INDIA’S SECULARISM

Sita Ram Goel

 2

CHAPTER - 1

When the European scholars in 18-19th centuries (CE) began to

translate the literature of India in their own languages, they felt a

special difficulty with regard to one word. That word was 'dharma'.

In European languages, there was no one word which could

completely express the essential nature of dharma. So the

European scholars had to make use of different words relative to

the context in which the word had been used in Indian literature.

In the English language, dharma was translated as religion,

righteousness, law, tradition, moral code, etc., according to the

context. Thus European scholars confirmed that great saying of

Bhishma Pitamaha in the Mahabharata: (the dynamics of dharma

is deep).

But the modern scholars in India did not have to experience any

such difficulty in the context of translation. They heard the word

'religion' of the English language and decided instantly and

unanimously that this word should be translated as 'dharma' in all

Indian languages.

The performance was very economical, so that all the sects of

Sanatana Dharma - Smarta, Jaina, Bauddha, Shaiva, Vaishnava,

 3

Shakta, Saurya, Ganapatya, Siddha and Santa on the one side,

and Islam and Christianity on the other, were brought within the

circumference of one common denomination - dharma.

Among the schools of Sanatana Dharma, the tradition of mutual

tolerance and equal regard was as old as the schools themselves.

This tradition was now extended to Islam and Christianity without

any doubt or hesitation. This extension (of equal regard) was quite

correct from the Sanatana Dharma point of view, if Islam and

Christianity were dharmas similar to the dharmas of the schools of

the Sanatana Dharma.

But Christian theologians and missionaries and the ulema and

mullahs of Islam could not wholly agree to this reciprocal exchange

of equal regard. They liked it very much that the schools of

Sanatana Dharma cultivate respect towards their religions, but

they could not agree to the proposition that their own religions

should manifest reciprocal regard for Sanatana Dharma or for any

of its schools.

Christian theologians and missionaries said that all schools of

Sanatana Dharma carry the message of Satan, and that they did

not conform to the divine message given by Jesus Christ. Muslim

 4

ulema and mullahs gave fatwas that all schools of Sanatana

Dharma were kufr and had nothing in common with the unique

revelation from Allah, conveyed through Prophet Muhammad.

The demand of discrimination was to find out a solution to this

dilemma. An attempt should have been made to know why Islam

and Christianity had nothing in common with Sanatana Dharma.

But Indian scholars paid no heed to the statements from the

spokesmen for Christianity and Islam. These scholars contented

themselves with this much only that the scriptures of Islam and

Christianity contained some sentences which sounded consistent

with Sanatana Dharma. And by publishing collections of such stray

sentences with their own comments, these scholars proclaimed

that they were experts on Islam and Christianity as well.

It is needless to say that this was a presumptuous attempt the evil

consequences of which the Hindu society has had to suffer. The

more strongly the Hindu society pronounces its goodwill towards

Islam and- Christianity, the more sharply increases Islam's

persistence to convert India into dar a/-Is/am (the land of Islam),

and Christianity's harangue that until India becomes the land of

Jesus, India's salvation is impossible.

 5

In this situation, the right course is that expositions of Islam and

Christianity be heard from the mouths of their own spokesmen,

and then alone a decision be taken whether, in the context of their

religions, the notion of equal regard towards them is justified or

not. The Hindu society should shed the illusion that it alone is

competent to speak on behalf of all other societies.

The Two Traditions of Worship

History stands witness that both Islam and Christianity have been

in conflict not only with Sanatana Dharma but also with many

other ways of worship which have flourished outside India. In fact,

conflict with regard to mode of worship commenced with the

emergence of that psyche which Christianity and Islam carry within

them. Before the rise of Christianity, no trace of any bloodshed

regarding mode of worship can be found in the history of the world.

With the advent of Islam, even those areas of the world were also

drenched in blood where the sword of Christianity had not reached.

Therefore, first of all we should get acquainted with the psyche of

Christianity and Islam, and then compare that psyche with the

other psyche which has been nourished in those traditions of

 6

worship which have been destroyed by Christianity and Islam or

which they want to destroy.

A bird's-eye view of the history of the world tells us that there have

been two traditions of worship. We will call one the tradition of

Advaita, and the other that of Monotheism.

The tradition of Advaita is found prevalent particularly in the

ancient cultures of India, Iran, Egypt, Greece, Rome, China and

Japan. Before the spread of Christianity, the Celt, German, Frank,

Slav and Scandinavian peoples of Europe were also followers of

Advaita. In the cultures of the original inhabitants of South and

North America, the stamp of Advaita is clearly visible. In those

communities of Africa also which have not yet been converted to

Christianity or Islam, consciousness of Advaita exists. In ancient

Ethiopia, the shape of Advaita was sufficiently refined.

On the other hand, Monotheism rose first of all among the Jews

who, after a long spell of nomadic life, had settled down in

Palestine. A detailed exposition as well as the history of their

Monotheism is available in the Old Testament of the Bible. Among

them was born Jesus whom some of his disciples proclaimed as the

'Christ' after his death. Christianity's exposition is available in the

 7

New Testament of the Bible. After organizing a powerful Church,

Christianity seized the Roman Empire in the fourth century (CE).

That empire had expanded far and wide in Europe, West Asia and

North Africa. Thereafter, Christianity spread in other parts of

Europe from the fifth to the fifteenth century and, by the beginning

of the sixteenth century, Christianity along with European

imperialism reached the countries of America, Africa and Asia.

Many countries among them became completely Christianized. Now

this faith is steadily spreading in the other countries.

The rise of Islam occurred in the first half of the seventh century

(CE). This faith had spread in its birthplace, Arabia, in the life-time

of its founder, Muhammad. Thereafter, Arab armies carried Islam

up to Spain through North Africa on the one side, and to Syria,

Palestine, Iraq, Iran, Khurasan, Central Asia and Sindh on the

other. The armies of Turkish imperialism strived for several

hundred years to spread Islam in. Europe on the one hand and in

India on the other. In Europe, this effort (to spread Islam) remained

wholly unsuccessful except in some regions, so much so that the

well-established rule of Islam in Spain was also uprooted. But in

India, Islam gained significant success. The present-day

Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, once parts of India, are the

 8

living examples of that success. In addition to this, in Indonesia,

Malaysia and several countries of Africa, Islam has spread its

tentacles far and wide.

Spread of Faith and Use of Force

In the tradition of Advaita, one characteristic is particularly

noteworthy. In the long history of this tradition, not a single

instance of spread of faith by use of force is available. Among the

countries and communities following the tradition of Advaita, many

wars have been fought due to many kinds of differences and

hostilities. But never has any war been fought for the spread of

faith. In this context, the spread of Buddhism is particularly

notable. In the spread of this dharma, not a single soldier ever

played any role. The monks of the Dharma Sangha alone carried

this faith far and wide. And in the countries where Buddhism

spread, it never came into conflict with the ancient modes of

worship prevalent in those countries.

On the other hand, the whole history of the spread of Monotheism

is the history of use of force in various ways. The expansion of

Christianity and Islam took place only through the use of armed

force or economic power or a combination both, by some

 9

imperialism or the other. In the process of this expansion, three

facts stare us in the face:

Firstly, the followers of Monotheism destroyed the religious places

of other faiths, broke or defiled the sacred images of their gods,

burnt their sacred scriptures, killed their priests and saints or

dishonored them, and made untiring efforts to destroy their

cultures, root and branch.

Secondly, the Monotheists converted the followers of other faiths at

the point of the sword or by tempting them with money or privilege

or by humiliating them in other ways.

Thirdly, the Monotheists slaughtered in cold blood the defeated

warriors of other faiths, enslaved and sold their innocent families in

far-off lands, and plundered all their movable, immovable and other

properties. Those followers of the other faiths who still survived

after all this mayhem, were made second class citizens, burdened

with many disabilities and trodden under foot in various ways by

the Monotheists in power.

The apologists of Christianity and Islam attribute the blame for

these horrors of history to the innate barbarism of this or that

conqueror tribe, and pronounce that in principle there is no place

 10

for use of force in Monotheistic faiths. And in support of this

contention, these scholars quote a few lines from the Bible or the

Quran. Hindu exponents of sarva-dharma-samabhava never tire of

supporting this apologetics. Therefore, it is a subject for enquiry as

to how much substance there is in this apologetics. History stands

witness that whenever and wherever the followers of Monotheism

have used force, its use has been openly praised by their clerics

and historians. They state quite clearly that the use of force is

sanctioned by their religion, and quote the relevant commandments

from their scriptures.

At the same time, we have to see as to why, in the traditions of

Advaita, there is no provision for use of force for spreading faith.

Examination of Advaita Spirituality

In many countries of the world, the traditions of Advaita have been

completely destroyed by Christianity and Islam. Only some

surviving literature of ancient Iran, Egypt, Greece and Rome

contains exposition of Advaita, clear or confused. It is only in India,

Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, South Korea and Japan that the

tradition has survived intact to a large' extent. A substantial

exposition of the material that can be collected from all these

 11

sources, is now available only in India. Therefore, it is with the help

of that exposition that we will make a presentation of Advaita.

The very first proposition that is immediately visible in all schools

of Advaita, is polytheism. In no school of Advaita is seen any

special emphasis on some God as the creator or controller of the

Cosmos. Contrary to this, many mythologies have grown around

numerous gods and goddesses. In some mythology one particular

god or goddess is installed as the supreme object of worship, and in

another some other god or goddess. And whatever god is installed

at any time as the supreme object of worship, all other gods and

goddesses get merged in him or her. One might say that each god

or goddess is an image of all the other gods and goddesses. In the

schools of Sanatana Dharma, several gods and goddesses are

known by a thousand names. This also is a clear indication that all

gods and goddesses are symbols of one infinite, ineffable and

indescribable supreme power. In the words of Tulsidas, (God is

infinite, so also the narratives in his praise).

The second proposition that is there in all schools of Advaita, is

that gods and goddesses may assume any animate or inanimate

form. Several gods and goddesses are found in the form of a

 12

human-male or a human-female or in their pair. Many gods and

goddesses are worshipped in the form of animals, birds, aquatic

creatures, rivers, mountains, plants, trees, etc. All these gods and

goddesses are worshipped as carved images. Many a time, un-

carved stones also become objects worship. This is a clear

indication of the truth that the entire animate and inanimate

creation is pervaded by one Being, and a devotee can worship that

Being in any form. And there is also found in the tradition of

Advaita, a provision for worship of the Formless which is beyond all

forms.

The third proposition that is found in all schools of Advaita, is that

there are many ways of worship. The same god can be worshipped

in various ways. Consequently, there is an abundance of schools in

this tradition. Every now and then, new schools arise, develop,

merge with some preexisting school, and also vanish. In this

tradition, what holds primacy is not the object of worship or the

mode of worship; but the devotion in the act of worship? The object

of worship or mode of worship can never be at fault. The fault can

lie only in the quality of devotion. In the words of Tulsidas, (the

level of one's devotion determines the form in which one sees God).

Therefore, the worshipper bears only the responsibility for his own
 13

conduct and thought; to watch the conduct and thought of others

or to preach uninvited to others, is not countenanced in this

tradition. In the words of Kabirdas, (as I went out in search the bad

one, I found none; but when I examined my own self, I found that

no one was worse than myself). Far from using force for the spread

of faith, even to be concerned with the conduct and thought of

others, indicates a fall from faith.

The fourth proposition that is found in the tradition of Advaita, is

that truth is eternal and impersonal. Realization of truth is not the

monopoly any particular person, nor can it be borrowed from any

other person. Any seeker who searches for truth in any place or at

any time, finds it in full. Truth is not the fragmented pieces

revealed progressively in chronological time; nor does truth ever

become brand new. The language or style of expressing that truth

may be novel. But if any person claims that he has searched for or

found or seen or heard a truth the like of which no other person

has ever known before, then in the tradition of Advaita he is

considered a liar and a victim of delusion. Buddha had said, "I have

become the Enlightened one by walking on the same path on which

the Enlightened Ones preceding me had walked, and the

succeeding Enlightened Ones will walk."

 14

The fifth proposition that is found in the tradition of Advaita, is that

man should not hold any belief which is not consistent with reason

from the very beginning and which is not verifiable ultimately at

some level of human consciousness. An inference which fails the

test of direct perception ultimately, has very little value. The word

'sabda-pramiifJa' which is found in the Shastras of Advaita

tradition, is a synonym for direct perception: sabda-pramiifJa, that

is, the proof which the accomplished persons have themselves

found thorough spiritual seeking and, hereafter, placed before

others. If we cannot test directly the teachings of Sri Krishna or

Buddha or some other avatar or spiritually perfect person, by

ascending into the highest consciousness of those great ones, then

those teachings are meaningless for us (the Rishis are seers of what

the mantras symbolize).

The sixth proposition that is found in the tradition of Advaita, is

that of vasudhaiva kutumbakam, that is, the whole of humanity is

a single family, and everyone of its members deserves and should

manifest the same considerate conduct from and towards all

others. The scope of considerate conduct is not confined to anyone

particular sect or community. So no person or sect or community

should do unto others what he or she or it does not like to be done

 15

unto him or her or it (I state in half a couplet what has been said in

a million treatises: Do not do unto others what you find

unpalatable for yourself).

The seventh proposition that is found in the tradition of Advaita, is

that while it concedes the superiority of humans it does not

consider other parts of creation as objects of human consumption.

The view that is fostered in a devotee of Advaita, is that all that is

there in the universe, animate or inanimate, manifests different

limbs of the One Vast Being and, while using those limbs for

sustenance and right livelihood, a feeling of friendship should be

cultivated towards all of them. Human superiority lies only in this

much that birth as a human being facilitates the attainment of

supreme truth. In the words of Tulsidas, human birth is (field for

spiritual seeking and gateway to final emancipation). Man in his

ordinary state is not the master of the universe. Man should

consider himself indebted for all the help and cooperation he gets

from various components of the universe for his subsistence and

his physical, intellectual and spiritual development. And man

should repay these debts according to his opportunity and

capacity. The Hindu doctrine of repaying the five debts - to rishis,

 16

ancestors, gods, humans, all other animate and inanimate

creatures - is expressive of the same principle.

In brief, the tradition of Advaita is empirical, rational, and spiritual.

The first aphorism of the esoteric presentation of that tradition is

(as in the microcosm, so in the macrocosm), that is, by exploring

the individual self, the secret of the universe can be discovered. Or

in other words, (the eternally transcendent which is immanent in

all, dwells within you). Greek thinkers say that "man is the

measure of all things", that is, man is the key for understanding

everything else. It is only by grasping this truth that the author of

the Mahabharata says (I tell you the great secret: There is nothing

superior to man). In the words of Chandidas, (man is the truth

above all other truths).

It is because of an appropriate knowledge of this secret, that the

tradition of Advaita does not keep repeating ad nauseam the name

of any One God who is extra-cosmic and who is not directly

accessible to by all human beings. The human soul in its secret

depths is the Supreme Soul. The human person, when purified,

becomes the Perfect Person. A seeker of Advaita, after becoming

spiritually perfect, says - (all this in the Vast), ~ (thou art That), (I
 17

am the Vast). Buddha had even abandoned the philosophy

centered round Soul and God or Being and Becoming. This

philosophy is likely to end in casuistry.

Hence, the tradition of Advaita is fully humanistic. The supreme

truth is surely eternal and impersonal, but it is attainable by every

person. Each person is a field for spiritual seeking, is a

bodhisattva. A person, after be-coming perfect through spiritual

seeking, ascends into the same supreme consciousness, on being

established in which, Sri Krishna came to be known as

Purushottama (the Perfect Person), and Sakyamuni as Samyak

Sambuddha (the Perfectly Enlightened). But each person has to

seek for himself. Spiritual attainment cannot be borrowed from any

messiah or prophet. No prophet can, by recommending a person,

send him to heaven, nor can that prophet, on being angry with any

person, push him into hell. In fact, the whole story of heaven and

hell is meant to deceive children. For each person, the inevitable

destiny is Nirvana, Moksha, the attainment of Paramapada (the

highest station), and enjoyment of bliss in all its infinities. And for

advancing towards that destiny, a person need not become

impatient. According to his own aptitude and in keeping with his

spiritual development, whatever spiritual merit a person earns in

 18

one birth, that becomes his capital for further progress in the next

birth. And this spiritual striving, practiced through many births,

continues till a person attains the perfect truth and himself

becomes that truth.

Fundamentals of Monotheism

Monotheism has three sects - Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

These three sects are scions of the same mother. They are born out

of same psyche, and the main mythical and doctrinal propositions

of all the three are similar. Therefore, first of all, we will describe

the propositions shared in common by these three faiths.

The first proposition of Monotheism is that the creator and

controller of the Cosmos is the One God who is unique, who does

not manifest himself in different forms, and who does not permit

the worship of any god or goddess other than himself. There is no

element outside or inside the Cosmos which is of the same

substance as the One God, or is his part, or is pervaded by him.

Therefore, to worship any other gods or goddesses or to regard any

part of the Cosmos as divine, is a serious crime against the One

God.
 19

The second proposition of Monotheism is that the One God has

created the Cosmos without the aid of any substance, that is, out

of sheer Void or Nothing. This miracle is indicative of the

omnipotence of the One God. If the One God had taken the least

aid from any substance, his omnipotence would have suffered

disparagement. For this very reason, he himself also remained

outside of his own creation.

The third proposition of Monotheism is that the human male is the

highest creation of the One God. At the time of creating the human

male, the One God made a clay figure of the human form and blew

his own breath into it. This breath became the soul of the human

male. Monotheism is not quite sure whether the human female has

a soul or not. The One God had taken one rib out of the human

male and carved it into a figure of the human female without

blowing his breath into that figure. Nor can human soul be

regarded as a divine entity. After acquiring the soul, the human

being became conscious and capable of thinking and also attained

the capacity to distinguish between vice and virtue. But this soul

cannot be considered a part of the One God. Monotheism is also

quite clear that all other animate and inanimate parts of creation
 20

have been created merely for enjoyment by humans, and humans

should not harbour any other feeling towards them.

According to the fourth proposition of Monotheism, man has only

one life and the supreme elevation of that life is an exclusive

worship of the One God. An indispensable part of that worship is

that man regulates all his conduct and thought in accordance with

the commandments of the One God. But man cannot acquaint

himself with those commandments by establishing direct contact

with the One God. The One God remains outside the Cosmos while

man remains inside it. Therefore, direct contact between the two is

inconceivable. Thus finding man groping in the dark, the One God

takes pity on him and, in order to convey his commandments to

man, he sends his prophets from time to time. Every

commandment of the One God revealed by each prophet is

unprecedented; it had never been heard before. In this process of

history, the One God at last sends his perfect prophet through

whose mouth a comprehensive and complete code of

commandments of the One God is received by man. This prophet is

called the Last Prophet who pronounces the final commandments

of the One God, to which nothing can be added and from which
 21

nothing can be subtracted. In the revelations by the Last Prophet,

the whole truth is incorporated.

According to the fifth proposition of Monotheism, two events take

place after the advent of the Last Prophet. Firstly, the history of

mankind gets divided into two periods. The period before the

coming of the Last Prophet, becomes the period of darkness or

ignorance, and the period thereafter the period of light or

knowledge. No mode of worship or cultural heritage or social

custom of the earlier period, remains valid and a complete

destruction of whatever prevailed earlier, is considered conducive to

salvation of mankind. Secondly, after the coming of the Last

Prophet, mankind is divided into two groups. One group is that

which professes complete faith in the Last Prophet and begins to

follow the path shown by him. The other group is that which

professes doubts regarding the Last Prophet or repudiates him. The

first group becomes dear to the One God, and the second invites

his wrath. The One God commands the first group to wage

ceaseless jihad against the second group, and either make that

group submit to the Last Prophet or annihilate it altogether.

 22

The sixth proposition of Monotheism is that the One God has

bestowed sovereignty of the whole world on his Last Prophet, and

the Last Prophet on the group professing complete faith in him. At

the same time, the One God has confiscated the lives and

properties of the group which rebels against his Last Prophet.

Therefore, the believing group has the sacred duty to obey his

commandments and seize the lives and properties of the rebel

group. Those of the rebel group who take to arms in their defense,

should be massacred. Their families should be captured and sold

into slavery. Their movable and immovable properties should be

plundered. Their religious places should be destroyed. Their

religious books should be burnt. Their saints and sages and priests

should be dishonored if not killed outright. And their whole

cultural wealth should be obliterated. Those of the rebel group who

accept defeat, should be converted to the faith of the conqueror. If

for any reason their conversion is not possible, they should be

made second class citizens and oppressed till they seek refuge in

the Last Prophet. In order to carry out the commandments of the

One God in the context of the rebel group, it is not required that

the moral character of the believing group be higher or their

consciousness purer. Professing exclusive faith in the Last Prophet

 23

is enough for them. (See Appendix 3 for the scriptural sanctions

which Monotheism provides for this behavior pattern).

According to the seventh proposition of Monotheism, on the Last

Day, all those born and dead from the beginning to end of creation,

will rise from their graves and present them-selves before the One

God for his Last Judgment. On that day, the Last Prophet will

reappear, sit on the right side of the One God, and give account of

the good and bad deeds of each human being. Those who had

professed faith in the Last Prophet will be sent to an everlasting

heaven where all the objects of enjoyment of the terrestrial world

will continue to be available for ever in their highest quality and

limitless quantity. On the other hand, those who had rebelled

against the Last Prophet will be thrown into an everlasting hell with

full arrangements for subjecting them to indescribable torments. In

the context of heaven and hell, it is to be noted that at the time of

delivering his judgment, the One God will pay attention not to the

conduct of the applicants but to their faith. Intense faith in the Last

Prophet, will enable the One God to forgive many faults of conduct.

The Last Prophet will also not falter in recommending favors for

those devoted to him exclusively.

 24

All these seven proposition are shared in common by Judaism,

Christianity and Islam. The conflict among these three creeds is

regarding the Last Prophet, leaving aside a few other secondary

matters. The Jews believe in Moses as their Last Prophet, the

Christians in Jesus Christ, and Muslims in Muhammad. Much

maligning and also killing has taken place among these three

creeds due to this conflict. The greatest sufferers have been the

Jews whom Christians and Muslims call killers of prophets and

corrupters of scriptures. Many holy wars have also been fought

between Christianity and Islam. But in spite of these mutual

differences, the followers of all these three faiths have displayed the

same hostility against the followers of Advaita. Slaughters made by

the Jews could not spread outside Palestine for various reasons.

But the Christians and the Muslims have painted many countries

with extensive bloodshed and destroyed the spiritual and cultural

wealth of those countries as far as they could.

Examination of Monotheism

Firstly, Monotheism presents no proof in support of any of its

propositions. All its arguments are specimens of round-about logic.

Existence of the One God is accepted because the prophet testifies

 25

to that existence. But the status of the prophet is hailed because he

claims that the One God speaks through him. If the exponents of

Monotheism are asked whether any other person can, by spiritual

seeking, attain that state of consciousness by attaining which the

prophet had heard the commandments of the One God, they

unanimously denounce it as inconceivable. Nor do they concede to

any other person the capacity to see the One God directly by any

method of spiritual seeking. To meet the One God directly is not

possible for any other person before the Day of Judgment. Again, it

all depends upon the sweet will of the One God as to when and

whom he may send as his prophet. In the history of Monotheism, it

has happened many a time that persons more than one proclaimed

themselves as prophets. Their dispute could be settled only when

one of them killed the others or got himself killed. In this situation,

it cannot be decided whether the One God that the prophet has

been raving about, has any real existence or not. Nor can it be said

that the commandments which the prophet has issued in the name

of the One God are not the ravings of his own mind. In this context,

the tradition of Monotheism is wholly contrary to the tradition of

Advaita, which regards direct perception as the only proof, and

 26

which gives equal right to all humans to realize the supreme truth

directly.

Secondly, Monotheism recognizes truth not as eternal but as the

latest. The truth that the prophet reveals thorough his sayings and,

doings was not known to anyone before his advent. This definition

of truth can only be termed as downright ridiculous. And when it is

said that truth has become complete after the advent of the Last

Prophet and that nothing can be added to or subtracted from it,

then this definition contradicts itself. Truth, if it is the latest,

cannot be complete till the end of time. And when countless

persons born before the Last Prophet or in his time or after him,

are pushed into hell simply because they have failed to profess

faith in the Last Prophet, then Monotheism has to be termed as

vile. All these persons could not hear the message of the Last

Prophet because either they were born before him or because no

mullah or missionary could reach them. How can these persons be

blamed for the offence of disregarding the Last Prophet? In this

context, the tradition of Monotheism is wholly contrary to the

tradition of Advaita, which regards truth as eternal and equally

accessible to all persons at all times and at all places.

 27

Thirdly, Monotheism regards truth not as impersonal but as

personal. The prophet alone is the person who can know or hear

the truth. All other persons have to borrow that truth from the

prophet and practice it as such. Consequently, the prophet very

soon usurps the place of the One God. Without submission to the

prophet, worship of the One God is not possible. N0T can the gates

of heaven open without recommendation from the prophet. In this

situation, it should not be a matter of surprise if the One God takes

leave or is left out. This is the inevitable transformation of

Monotheism. In this context, the tradition of Monotheism is wholly

contrary to the tradition of Advaita, which regards truth as

impersonal and admits that (whoever seeks, he finds).

Fourthly, Monotheism renders the supreme power impotent and

the entire Cosmos an extension of matter. The One God,

intoxicated as he was with his omnipotence, did create the universe

out of Nothing or the Void, but, for the same reason, he himself

remained outside his own creation. He became incapable of

establishing contact with his own creatures and, in order to convey

his message to human beings created by himself, he had to seek

the help of a prophet. To describe such a helpless One God as

almighty is ridiculous. This debasement of the One God is

 28

surpassed by the debasement of his creation. As a consequence of

the One God remaining outside, whatever there is in the Cosmos is

material and man has unhindered right to use it all. Therefore,

with the decline of Christianity in the Western countries, there

erupted a volcano of materialism and consumerism. The natural

resources began to be ruthlessly exploited. The incurable epidemic

of consumerism which is pushing the word towards destruction

today, had its seed in the Monotheism of Christianity. Islam

followed the same path. In this context, the tradition of

Monotheism is wholly contrary to the tradition of Advaita, which

sees extension of the same divinity in all animate and inanimate

beings and imposes limits on consumption.

Fifthly, the Supreme Being of Monotheism (whether Jehovah or

Allah) comes out as a despot who is also an arbitrary, partisan, and

jealous gangster. If the sayings and doings which have been

sanctioned in the various scriptures of Monotheism as

commandments of the One God, really emanate from that One God,

then there remains no scope for doubt that the One God is simply

another name for Satan described in those very scriptures. That is

why the devotees of the One God invoke him while committing all

those atrocities which are described in detail in the history of

 29

creeds professing Monotheism. In this context, the tradition of

Monotheism is wholly contrary to the tradition of Advaita, which

regards the Supreme Being as Sacchidananda - Truth,

Consciousness and Bliss -, the savior of the virtuous and the

purifier of the sinful.

Sixthly, by dividing human history into two periods and the human

race into two mutually hostile groups, Monotheism gives to one

group the right to destroy, without any compunction, the cultural

wealth of the other group, slaughter that group mercilessly, grab its

properties, and bind it into bonds of slavery. In fact, the ideology of

Monotheism is replete with an unquenchable barbarism the

explosion of which has been witnessed time and again, and in

consequence of which the progress of, human civilization and

culture has been greatly impeded. Monotheism rationalizes the

animal drives present in human nature. It is not an accident that

whenever and wherever Monotheism has held sway, then and there

an unbridled devil dance of evil has been enacted. The story of

crimes committed under the auspices of Monotheism is exceedingly

long. In this context, the tradition of Monotheism is wholly contrary

to the tradition of Advaita, which protects the precious cultural

wealth accumulated in the course of time, and promotes the

 30

attitude of vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the whole world is one

fraternity).

Lastly, it has to be said that Monotheism, by smothering diversity

in belief and behaviour of people, fosters uniformity. To describe

this uniformity as universality, is the dreadful mistake that every

kind of Monotheism has committed. Monotheism fails to

understand that there are many regions, many countries, many

races, and countless human beings with different natures and

temperaments. It prescribes a uniform pattern of belief and

behaviour for all countries, for all times, for all races, and for all

persons. Monotheism fails to see whether all men are capable of

living up to that pattern of belief and behaviour, or not. Moreover,

for practising that uniform pattern, man has got only one life. If in

that one life a man fails to live up to that pattern, then he is

consigned to an everlasting hell. Monotheism has not given any

opportunity to anyone to rectify one's mistake. In this context, the

tradition of Monotheism is wholly contrary to the tradition of

Advaita, which provides for diversity of belief and behaviour in

accordance with the stage of a man's spiritual development and

aptitude and which, affirming that each man is a bodhisattva, gives

 31

an opportunity to him for spiritual seeking through a cycle of

rebirths.

In brief, the tradition of Advaita regards direct perception as the

only proof of its propositions, whether that direct perception be

through the senses or extra-sensory. The tradition of Advaita

regards truth as eternal and impersonal, and grants to everyone

the right to approach truth direct. This tradition sees the Supreme

Truth manifest in many forms outside as well as inside the

Cosmos, provides for different ways of worship, holds behavior

superior to belief, denounces use of force for spreading of faith,

does not rationalize any animal drive present in human nature,

promotes many cultures in accordance with time and place, and

repudiates all kinds of imperialism.

On the other hand, the tradition of the Monotheism is not based on

any kind of positive proof, regards truth as new and personal,

describes its One God as unique and outside the Cosmos, provides

for only one pattern of belief and behavior by presenting the Last

Prophet as the ideal person, holds belief superior to behavior, gives

validity to use of force for spreading the faith, rationalizes all kinds
 32

of animal drives present in human nature, and encourages

imperialistic ambitions.

In the end, one clarification is desirable. The above analysis of

Advaita and Monotheism is wholly right at the level of ideas. But

this analysis cannot be applied mechanically to all persons born

and brought up in these opposite traditions. The head and heart of

a person can be larger or smaller than any thought pattern. Unless

a person brought up and bred in any tradition accepts that

tradition consciously and begins to imbibe and promote it, the

tradition does not become manifest in his life. It is not enough to

merely mouth support for any pattern of belief and behavior.

Therefore, ordinary men born and brought up in both the traditions

are found to be of good as well as bad behavior. Differences arise

when different individuals espouse the opposite traditions of

Advaita and Monotheism intellectually and cherish them

consciously. Then the tradition of Monotheism gives birth to

Aurangzeb, and the tradition of Advaita to Shivaji.

 33

CHAPTER- 2

SECULARISM: PERVERSION OF MEANING

There is a famous adage (the crow tried to walk like the swan, but

ended by forgetting its own way of walking). Such a transformation

is considered crazy, but not calamitous. But when a swan forgets

its own identity and begins to ape a crow, then a terrible tragedy

takes place. In this hallowed land of Sanatana Dharma where,

before the advent of Islam, there had never been any bloodshed in

the name of dharma, we have only invited great trouble for

ourselves by importing the alien concept of Secularism from

Europe.

Perversion of Meaning in Translation

In the ethos and history of Europe, many concepts have originated

and developed which we cannot understand without a proper study

of that ethos and history. When we adopt those concepts by

translating them literally or even substantially in our own language

and make them current in our country which has had a different

ethos and history, then we not only render those concepts invalid

but also corrupt and obscure the heritage of our culture. The
 34

concept of Secularism which we have made current in our politics

by calling it dharmanirpekshata or sarva-dharma-samabhava, is

one such concept.

The ideology which was propagated and spread and made known

as religion in the history of Europe after the rise of Christianity, is

not traceable in the history of India before the advent of Islam and

Christianity in this country. And the dharmic ethos which had

prevailed in this country for ages past during the pre-Islamic

period, is not found in the history of Europe after the rise of

Christianity. Therefore, In order to avoid the perversion of meaning

arising from translation, we are using the word 'secularism' itself in

this book. We cannot find any word in Indian languages which can

convey the correct meaning of this alien concept.

Secularism: Rise and Development

In the countries of Europe, after the fourth and before the

eighteenth century (CE), there was a strong bond between the

Christian Church and the State. The function of the State was not

only to supervise and control the worldly (secular) life of its

subjects, but also to secure their salvation in the next world. The

key to salvation in the next world was in possession of the Church.

 35

But if any citizen disregarded or violated the rules of conduct

proclaimed by the Church from time to time, the Church pleaded

that it was incapable of inflicting physical punishment on him. The

Church used to excommunicate him and thus close the gate of

heaven for him. Thereafter, it was the duty of the State to burn that

man alive or kill him by means of other tortures or throw him into

prison. Besides this, in most countries of Europe, there were Jews

whom the Church had stigmatized as the "killers of Christ". The

Jews had been deprived of all citizenship rights. Even so, from time

to time the State inflicted many atrocities on them on orders from

the Church, or fanatic Christian mobs subjected the Jewish

settlements to repeated rounds of terror and gangsterism without

any fear of the State. Hence, in the language of the Church the

State was termed the "secular arm" of the Church, and the' State

also admitted publicly that its main function was to serve the

Church.

So long as the continent of Europe retained communities which

were yet to be converted to Christianity, cooperation between the

Church and the State continued smoothly. The Church had given

absolute liberty to the kings to expand their domains in the name

of spreading Christianity. The kings also used the sword, as far as

 36

practicable, for converting the non-Christians to Christianity or for

slaughtering them or for trampling them under foot in other ways.

The Church applauded the kings wholeheartedly for their services.

In turn, the kings also claimed that they were striving heart and

soul in order to save the pagans from hell-fire. In this sinister

alliance, both the kings and the Church extended their dominions

and domination. Dissensions also cropped up between the two from

time to time, but cooperation was so beneficial that conflicts

continued to be resolved.

Thereafter, a time came at the end of the fifteenth century when the

Whole of Europe became Christianized. The kings were no more in

need of blessings from the Church in order to augment their power.

The State began to feel restless against the stranglehold which the

Church had imposed on it. In the sixteenth century, widespread

revolts broke out against the Church and Christianity got

splintered into several sects. But the reformist sects of Christianity

proved to be far more intolerant, and a terrible carnage took place

all over Europe in the name of religion. The State in one country,

by aligning with one sect, began to suppress the other sects, while

the State in another country, by aligning with another sect, began

 37

to suppress all others. And wars began to be fought among

different countries in the name of religion.

Fortunately for Europe, during that very period, the leading

thinkers of Europe had come in contact with some ancient

cultures. Among these cultures, the culture of ancient Greece was

the foremost. These thinkers also learnt much from the ancient

cultures of India and China. And influenced by the humanism,

rationalism and universalism inherent in these cultures, they

revolted against Christianity. Christianity did not have the capacity

to pass the test posed by reason, and before long the whole

mumbo-jumbo of Christianity crumbled. At the end of the

eighteenth century, along with the French Revolution, this process

got accelerated.

This was the background in which Secularism arose in Europe. In

the nineteenth century, the State was liberated from the

stranglehold of the Church in every country in Europe. It was no

longer the function of the State to secure salvation for its citizens.

To seek and strive for salvation in the next world or not, became

now the personal concern of each citizen. The State had now no

concern with the personal belief or unbelief of a citizen. To

 38

supervise and regulate the conduct of a citizen in this world alone,

remained the function of the State. The State, thus freed from the

stranglehold of the Church, became known as the Secular State,

and gradually Europe evolved a culture which repudiated all sorts

of religious fanaticism.

Relevance of Secularism in India

At the time of independence, there existed in India also two forms

of that ideology tormented by which Europe had adopted the

concept of Secularism. One form of that ideology was Islam and the

other Christianity. Islam which came into this country with alien

imperialism, had made unbridled use of state power for several

hundred years (like Christianity in Europe) in order to sustain its

gangsterism, and divided the country eventually. Likewise,

Christianity also used state power in order to commit all sorts of

atrocities for its propagation and expansion in the region of Goa

and elsewhere in the sixteenth century. The British also should

have carried out similar sinister schemes, had it not freed itself

from the stranglehold of Christianity by the time it got consolidated

in India.
 39

On the other hand, the Hindu society throughout its long history,

had neither displayed any sort of religious fanaticism, nor ever

used the state power for spreading any faith. To preach Secularism

to this society, was like showing a lamp to the sun. In such a-

country, Secularism could have relevance only in one sense - to

establish complete cultural freedom in the Hindu homeland by

eliminating the fanaticism which had survived in the form of Islam

and Christianity.

This was a task of education. By confronting the Muslims and

Christians with the close connection between their scriptures and

their blood-soaked histories, it had to be explained to them that the

teachings which they believed to be God-given were, in reality,

expressions of beastliness latent in human nature. Of the ethos

which the Hindu society has cherished as dharmic, not a trace can

be found in Islam or Christianity. The right use of Secularism

would have been to unmask these closed creeds and liberate the

communities which had become their victims.

The Intellectual Perversion

But what happened in India after independence was just the

opposite. The mullahs and missionaries, who had exhibited

 40

ceaseless hostility towards the ancient culture of this country,

began to speak with one voice that there was a great danger to the

religions and cultures of the Muslims and Christians from the

majority Hindu society, and that the state would have to protect

them by all means. It was, as the saying goes, (the thief accusing

the policeman who had caught him red-handed). The Hindu

society, in fact, had always suffered atrocities at the hands of the

Muslims and Christians and never given even a threat of

retaliation. But the party in power agreed with the mullahs and

missionaries, and conceded many privileges to the so-called

minorities in the Constitution of India. The Muslims and Christians

were given complete freedom to propagate and spread their creeds

to the best of their capacity. And this suicidal policy was advertised

as ‘secularism’.

The evil consequences of this pervert policy began to appear very

soon. The Muslims, after obtaining support of the ruling party,

began to spread their tentacles all around. By clamouring in the

name of the distinctive culture of Islam and special rights of the

minorities, they began to raise the same kind of demands because

of which only some time back the country had been partitioned and

rivers of blood had flown. And in support of these demands, they

 41

began to stage riots as well. At the same time, the Christian

missionaries obtained unlimited funds from the Western countries

and began to extend their network all over the country.

Some patriotic people could not remain mute spectators to all this.

They came out against this perversion of Secularism. The ruling

party issued a fatwa at once that the people pointing an accusing

finger at Secularism were communalists and enemies of national

unity. In due course, a new meaning of Secularism began to be

fortified - Secularism, that is, applause for Islam and Christianity.

And Hindu society began to be denounced as a nest of narrow-

minded and aggressive communalism. The English-educated

intelligentsia of this country in particular adopted these new

formulations wholeheartedly. All political parties also began to

swear by this Secularism.

The Christian missionaries had never had any shortage of money.

The mullahs also began to receive unlimited funds from Arab

countries due to exorbitant increase in the price of petrol in the

eighth decade of this century. And because of the campaigns

mounted by Islam and Christianity, the situation has now become

quite frightful. Many people who supported Secularism till the

 42

other day, have now begun to admit that something has seriously

gone wrong somewhere.

Scrutiny of the Perversion

Why did Secularism acquire this perverted form in India?

Why has the ideology of fanaticism to get rid of which Europe had

developed Secularism, fattened in this country in the guise' of

Secularism? The right answers to these vital questions have to be

found by the Hindu society.

The story of sticking the stigma of communalism on the Hindu

society had started before India attained independence. The leaders

of the Indian National Congress had tried to make the Muslims

partners in the struggle for independence by tending many

concessions to them. But the Muslims had never yielded to the,

Congress, and remained allies of British imperialism up to the end.

The leaders of the Congress had never tried to understand this

Muslim behaviour pattern. The more they failed to bring around

the Muslims, the more they blamed their failure on the so-called

Hindu communalism. In their opinion, it was Hindu communalism

 43

which, by inciting Muslim communalism, had become a stumbling

block in their way. Thus the leader's of the Congress had confirmed

the adage according to which when a potter cannot control the

potteress, he twists the ears of his donkey.

In the last phase of the struggle for independence, a leftist faction

had risen inside the Congress. The leader of this faction was Pandit

Jawaharlal Nehru. Inspired by the Soviet Union and Communism,

this faction had harbored a deep-seated animosity against Hindu

society and culture. In the opinion of this faction, Islam was

propagator of an equalitarian social system while the ancient

culture of India stood for all sorts of inequalities and caste

discriminations. The members of this faction had as much

knowledge of Islam as that of Sanatana Dharma, that is, they were

equally ignorant about both. They were only repeating the

propaganda being promoted by the Communist Party of India

which viewed the ancient culture of this country as its main enemy.

But because of being powerful in the Congress, this faction

succeeded to a great extent in blackening Hindu society and

culture.
 44

And when India became independent, this faction rose to power

under Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. History stands witness that the

Muslims could divide the country only because they were

patronized by this faction. But this faction passed the whole blame

of partition on to the so-called Hindu communalism. Those people

who fought for united India and had stubbornly resisted partition,

were now being held responsible for partition by the ruling party!

And it was for the sake of defaming these people that the new

leaders of the Congress Party raised the slogan of Secularism. Thus

the policy of Secularism proclaimed by Pandit Nehru after

attainment of independence, was, from the very beginning, full of

animosity towards the Hindu society and culture. The

consequences of this policy which followed in due course, should

surprise no one.

The reason why Hindu society has remained incapable of defeating

this policy, is that this society has got engaged in the self-

destructive process of being on the defensive without

understanding this perversion of Secularism. Whenever the

enemies of this society accuse it of being communal, it starts

breast-beating and wailing that this accusation is without

substance. This society cannot muster the courage to proclaim that

 45

it is the national society of India, and that people who accuse it of

being communal are themselves traitors to the nation, straight

away.

A more serious mistake that Hindu society has committed is to

keep on repeating the slogan of 'sarva-dharma-samabhava' - equal

regard for all dharmas - with regard to Islam and Christianity. The

principle of sarva-dharma-samabhava has always been accepted

and practised among the schools of Sanatana Dharma. But to

entertain samabhava (equal regard) towards Islam and Christianity,

by giving them the status of dharma, is to extend invitation to

doom. A study of the scriptures, traditions and history of Islam and

Christianity, makes it more than evident that these ideologies are

not worthy of being called dharma in any sense of the term.

Contrary to this, these ideologies are brimful of imperialistic

ambitions. By accepting them as dharma, it becomes impossible to

resist their imperialistic expansion. There should be no place for

doubt in this matter. Wherever the impact of Islam and Christianity

has grown, it has given fillip to treason. Afghanistan, Pakistan and

Bangladesh were inseparable parts of India for ages past. Islam

severed these parts from the motherland. In the North-East region

 46

of India, the increasing spell of Christianity is also inciting moves of

separatism in the same way.

Treatment of the Disease

Therefore, if Hindu society wants to survive, it would have to

proclaim loud and clear the following basic principles of Hindu

culture:

1. The society which is known as Hindu society at present, is

the national society of India.

2. Indian culture as nourished by the Sanatana Dharma and

flourishing through many schools and sects, is the national

culture of India.

3. The history of the Hindu society, is the history of India.

4. India is one indivisible whole.

 47

The following conclusions which flow from these basic, principles,

would also have to be accepted, acknowledged and proclaimed by

the national society:

1. The imperialisms of Islam and Christianity have disappeared

from this country, and, therefore, there remains no place in

this country for Islam and Christianity.

2. The communities which have been crystallized in India as a

result of the imperialistic expansion of Islam and Christianity,

are our own people and will have to be brought back into the

national society.

3. The national society is secular by its very nature and people

who accuse it of being communal and practise hostility

towards the ancient culture of India in the name of

Secularism, are traitors, no matter how powerful, celebrated

and self-satisfied these people may be at present.

4. The national society not only takes the pledge that, hereafter,

it will not allow any community to divide India but also

resolves that those parts of India which Islam has severed

and those members of the national society whom Islam and

Christianity have alienated from their ancestral culture, will

 48

be brought back to their national homeland and their

national society.

This call can go forth from the national society only when its

intelligentsia and its leaders acquire a full understanding of

Sanatana Dharma and its culture, and become committed to it with

deep devotion. These conclusions can be drawn only when the

intelligentsia of the national society and its leaders evaluate Islam

and Christianity from the viewpoint of Sanatana Dharma, and

understand the imperialistic and anti-humanistic character of

these ideologies.
 49

Chapter - 3

Challenge of Islam and Hindu Response

Islam had set its foot on the Hindu homeland in the second half of

the seventh century. From then on till today, this creed has

remained a nightmare for Hindu society and culture. Islam has

victimized, tormented and terrorized the Hindu society in many

ways. It has inflicted many wounds on Hindu culture. Some

integral parts of India, have become foreign countries by falling into

the clutches of Islamic imperialism. Many members of Hindu

society have become self-alienated after having been terrorized or

tempted by Islam. Today, the same people are behaving with deep

animosity against Hindu society and culture.

In 1947, at the time of conceding partition, it had been proclaimed

that the so-called communal problem had been solved for all time

to come. But hardly fifty years have passed and the followers of

Islam have again started speaking the same language which they

had used before the partition of India. Communal riots have again

started assuming terrible form. And the elements harboring

hostility towards the Hindu society, have again started cursing

'Hindu communalism'. The situation has deteriorated to such an

 50

extent that today a Hindu hesitates in making himself known as a

Hindu. Being apologetic all the time, has become a habit of the

Hindu society.

Why has all this happened, and is happening? The Hindu society

will have to find an answer to this question. There should be no

delay in this matter. Otherwise, this time the very survival of Hindu

society will certainly become difficult, if not impossible, because the

vast wealth that Islam has acquired through its stores of oil has

once again rejuvenated and made it aggressive. A part of this

wealth is being spent for creating many turmoils in this country,

and will continue to do so more and more with increasing speed. If

the need arises, the followers of Islam living in India will also easily

obtain arms and ammunitions. At that time, the self-appointed

custodians of Secularism will not be found anywhere on the scene.

We should remember how these cowards ran away from Pakistan

and Bangladesh, after having sung for years the glories of Islam

and cursed 'Hindu communalism'. The storm will have to be faced

by the Hindu society alone.

The Basic Blunder

 51

After having studied Islamic scriptures and Islamic history as

unfolded in my own country and abroad, I have reached the

definite conclusion that Hindu society has committed a

fundamental and suicidal blunder. It is because of this blunder

that Hindu society has not been able to diagnose the epidemic till

today. And if this blunder is not corrected, there will be no end to

this epidemic.

That blunder is to recognize Islam as a dharma. How many more

blunders have been committed and are being committed as a

consequence of this basic blunder, is the subject-matter of this

chapter. Discussion of this subject is being undertaken in the

perspective of history.

Response in the First Phase

The founder of Islam, Muhammad, died in 632 (CE). After that

event, within twenty years, a gangster horde raised by him in

Arabia trampled under its feet all nations and cultures up to the

western frontiers of India. Among those so utterly destroyed, the

ancient and powerful Persian empire was the most prominent. But

the same gangster horde had to struggle strenuously for seventy

years before crossing the frontier of Sindh. The small Hindu states
 52

of Sindh, Sauvir and Gandhar put to flight again and again the

armies sent repeatedly by the Caliphs at Damascus. All these

accounts recorded by the contemporary and later Muslim

historians, are readily available in history books. Thereafter, an

Arab army penetrated into Sindh in 712 (CE), and by stages its

raids reached Ujjain in the east, Kangra in the north, and Navasari

towards the south. How that army was defeated by Hindu heroism

and finally became besieged in Multan and Mansura - all this

history has also been written by contemporary Muslim chroniclers.

But nowhere do we find in history, indigenous or Islamic, even a

hint as to what Hindu society thought of and surmised about Islam

which had inspired these armies.

It cannot be said that Islam had left anything undone in making

itself well known. Slaughter of the defeated armies after they had

surrendered, public auction abroad of thousands of men and

women and children who had been captured and sent there, mass

rape of helpless women, destruction of temples, burning of the

sacred books of dharma, breaking of idols of the gods, plunder of

all kinds of property ~ all these doings of the Islamized Arabs have

been applauded by the Muslim theologians and historians and

proclaimed as the great triumph of Islam. At the same time, they

 53

have quoted those passages from the Quran and Hadis according to

which to do all this is obligatory and meritorious in Islam.

But if the contemporary thinkers of Hindu society who saw or

heard of all these atrocities drew any conclusions about the

character of Islam, no clue is available anywhere in the

contemporary indigenous literature. Internecine wars had often

been fought in India. The Greek, Saka and Huna tribes had also

mounted many invasions from outside India, descriptions of which

are available from Indian sources. But the devil dance enacted by

the armies of Islam, was wholly unprecedented for Hindu society.

Slaughtering of people who had surrendered, capturing and

exporting of innocent persons to foreign countries, dishonouring

helpless women, plundering the defeated people - all these

atrocities were unthinkable in the Indian tradition and history up

till then. And the most unthinkable of all was the fact that Islamic

armies committed all these fiendish deeds by invoking verbatim

their religious scriptures. Even so, the thinkers of India did not

undertake any critical study of these unprecedented happenings.

Accounts of the unequalled heroism which Hindu Rajas displayed

in face of the Islamic armies, are available in contemporary and

later Indian literature as also in inscriptions. But there is no

 54

allusion to any careful study of and contemplation on the gangster

mentality of these armies.

It cannot be said that India was bereft of thinkers in that period.

The life-time of Adi Shankaracharya is considered contemporary to

Arab invasions. A detailed description of many other contemporary

thinkers - Buddhist, Jain, Vaish¬nava, Shaiva, Shakta, Tantrik,

Yogic - is also available from those times. It is not conceivable that

none of them had heard the name of Islam, or accounts of the

atrocities committed by its armies. But all these thinkers could not

entertain any proposition beyond (Brahma alone is Real, the world

is an illusion). Perhaps evil conduct in this unreal world was no

more than an illusion for them. Perhaps they could see no reason

for discussing an illusion.

After being defeated in the very first adventure, the armies of Islam

did not turn their face towards India for the next two hundred

years. But some so-called saints of Islam came and settled down in

many towns and villages, particularly in northern India and along

the west coast. Muslim historians are witness as to how the Hindu

Rajas and ordinary people welcomed these impostors, and how they

were given land and money for building mosques and khanqahs.
 55

And when these charlatans began converting some Hindus to

Islam, no one checked them. The sorcery, magic spells and

'miracles' performed by them, enchanted the minds of many

Hindus. No one paid any attention to the fact that it were these

very 'saints' who some time back applauded wholeheartedly the

advancing Arab armies, and held the latter's atrocities wholly

proper and sanctioned by Islam. Therefore, it is not a matter of

surprise that at a later stage these Muslim 'saints', worked as spies

for Islam in India, and guided Mahmud Ghaznavi to Nandana,

Kangra, Thanesar, Mathura, Kannauj, Kalanjar and Somnath.

Muslim historians do sing praises of the services rendered by

Muslim saints in the advancement of Islam, and rightly so. But

why do Hindus perform pilgrimages to the tombs of these

despicable characters, offer homage to them with great devotion

and listen to qawwalis? The only reason for this aberration has

been that Hindu society has recognized Islam as a dharma.

Hindu society was never wanting in heroism. Mahmud Ghaznavi

returned to Ghazni again and again after plundering and

slaughtering, not because he did not want to annex India to his

empire but because, leaving aside Punjab and some parts of Sindh,

he could not conquer any other kingdom. The rising tide of the
 56

Hindu counter-attacks from all sides had been forcing him every

time to retrace his steps and return. It may be remembered that

Ghaznavi was an incomparable military general of his time, and

that he had expanded his empire far and wide in Khurasan and

Iran.

But while Hindu society used armed prowess, it did not make use

of the power of thought. In the abundant literature composed by

the Hindu thinkers of that period, no indication is available that

anyone had identified the essential character of Islam. Nor is there

any indication that anyone censured the swindlers known as Sufis

on account of their questionable character. The Ghazi (kafir-killer)

of Islam (Mahmud) who had been invited by the Sufis went back

acknowledging defeat, but the Sufi silsilas (orders) remained

established flourished and continued getting funds and reverence

from within India - the khanqahs (monasteries) of these sufis, there

were caged those helpless Hindu women who had been captured by

Ghaznavi and presented to them as their reward. The sufis had

also received an ample share of the Indian wealth plundered by

Ghaznavi. They continued enjoying the wealth and the women in a

mood of bliss. The wail of the helpless Hindu women did not bother

Hindu society. On the contrary, simply because they had fallen into
 57

the hands of the mlechhas (unclean barbarians) those helpless

women were damned as outside the pale.

This was the reason that, after another 150 years, Muhammad

Ghauri marched against India raising once again the battle-cry of

Islam. The sufi named Muinuddin Chishti who was later on buried

in Ajmer, also accompanied him. In 1178 (CE), Ghauri fled after he

was defeated near Abu by an army commanded by the widow

queen of the Chaulukya king of Gujarat. In 1191, the same Ghauri

fled again after he was beaten by Prithvi Raj Chauhan. At that time,

the Chaulukya and Chauhan empires had so much power that, by

pursuing Ghauri, they could have recaptured the north-western

region seized by Islam and, after crushing Ghazni and Ghaur,

stormed the Kabah wherefrom the Islamic epidemic had been

spreading terror in India in wave after wave. It was the claim of

Islam that the Hindu temples were built of brick and mortar, that

Hindu idols of the gods were only pieces of stone, and that those

temples and idols possessed no power of self-protection. This

insane argument could have been countered only by the

destruction of all mosques from Lahore to Mecca. Islam would have

then realized at once that its Kabah also had no power of self-

protection, that it was also made of brick and mortar, and that the
 58

piece of black stone enshrined in it was only a piece of stone.

Hindu heroism went waste because the power of thought was not

used to analyses the situation. Chishti entrenched himself at

Ajmer, and sent word to Ghauri that victory over the Hindu armies

could be won not by military might but by deception.

Ghauri followed Chishti's advice. In 1192 (CE), when he returned to

the battlefield of Tarauri, the Chauhan King reminded him 'of how

he had run away last time. Ghauri replied that he had come not on

his own but on orders from his elder brother, Sultan Ghiyasuddin

of Ghaur, and could not go back without obtaining orders from

him. He also said that he had sent the message of Prithvi Raj to his

elder brother, and that he would refrain from fighting till the

latter's orders arrived. The Rajput army laid aside its arms, and

that very night Ghauri's army defeated and dispersed it. But no

Hindu took the trouble to know the fact that practising deception

with the Kafirs was sanctioned by the scriptures of Islam. The

Hindu literature of this period is full of the tales of Rajput heroism.

But not a word is found there about the scriptures of Islam. As a

result, Chishti remained established blissfully in Ajmer and

continued exhibiting his 'miracles'. Witnessing the destruction of

Hindu temples of Ajmer, Chishti offered thanks to his Allah. Allah

 59

had gained victory, and the face of infidelity had been blackened.

No wonder, Allah made Ajmer the principal place of Islamic

pilgrimage in India. The rice cooked, the flowers offered, and the

wealth amassed at the tomb of Chishti, are partly the gifts from

Hindus. But no Hindu till today has taken the trouble to know who

really was the sufi entombed there, and how terrible was the

traitorous role he had played against India. The reason, again, is

that the Hindu society has accepted Islam as a dharma.

Response in the Second Phase

Ghauri laid the foundation of the rule of Islam in India. One of his

army commanders, Bakhtiyar Khilji, attacked the Buddhist

monasteries in Bihar, massacred Buddhist monks, burnt libraries

of the universities situated there, and destroyed many Buddhist

temples. After his conquest of Bengal, he was defeated in Assam

and killed. Another army commander of Ghauri, Qutbuddin Aibak,

erected the Quwwat-ul-Islam (Might of Islam) masjid at Delhi with

the debris of 27 Hindu temples he had demolished and also

destroyed the remaining temples in Ajmer. Thereafter, all

succeeding sultans committed detestable deeds of similar nature,

wherever they could.

 60

The idols from the temples were placed under the stairs of mosques

and as footsteps in the lavatories of sultans and amirs. Most of the

historical masjids and khanqahs found in India today, have been

built by destroying Hindu temples and monasteries or after

desecrating them. The Archaeological Survey of India has copious

records of this holocaust. Besides this, many other atrocities - rape

of helpless women, dis¬honouring and killing of sadhus and saints,

cold-blooded slaughter of people defeated in war including the

young and the aged, capture and sale of Hindu men and women

and children as slaves, plunder of Hindu properties, killing of cows,

humiliation of Brahmins by shaving their heads and breaking their

sacred threads - were heaped on Hindus non¬stop. Mamluk, Khilji,

Tughlaq, Sayyad, Lodi - in the reigns of all the rulers of these

Muslim dynasties, from the beginning of the thirteenth century to

the end of the fifteenth, this process continued.

Islamic law has four schools - Hanbali, Maliki, Shafii and Hanafi.

The first three schools advocated that the Hindus were not People

of the Book, like the Christians and the Jews, that is, they did not

possess any revealed scriptures such as the Old Testament of the

Jews, the New Testament of the Christians and the Quran of the

Muslims - the three Books revealed by the same 'God' to these

 61

peoples through his prophets sent form time to time. Therefore,

according to these three schools, the Hindus had either to convert

and become Muslims, or had to be killed. They could not be treated

as dhimmis (protected subjects), and spared their lives by paying

Jizyah (poll-tax) as well as submitting to disabilities imposed on

them. Only the Hanafi school held that the Hindus could also be

accepted as People of the Book and made Zimmis. The sultans and

the Muslim army commanders spared no efforts to see that Hindus

became Muslims, or were wiped out. But Hindu heroism had not

been exhausted. They kept on ceaseless resistance. In the end, the

sultans and the army commanders became weary of waging wars.

They accepted defeat and proclaimed that, in

India, Islam was adherent of the Hanafi school of law. Hearing this

proclamation, the sufis and the ulema got very much perturbed.

But the sufis and the ulema did not have to fight in the fields. The

sultans simply ignored them.

One of these sufis was Nizamuddin Auliya whose tomb in Delhi

continues to be revered by the Hindus. His principal disciple was

Amir Khusrau on whom honours are heaped even today by many

Hindus. Khusrau was a court poet, and writing eulogies of the

 62

ruling sultan was his only profession. Soon after writing the eulogy

of one sultan, he would write a similar one for another who

ascended the throne by murdering the earlier one. The extension of

the Hanafi law to the Hindus, made him feel greatly enraged. He

wrote: "The heroism of our holy warriors has saturated the whole

country with streams (of blood) flowing from the sword (of Islam).

The clouds of infidelity have been dispersed. The mighty warriors of

Hind have been trampled underfoot. Now they are all ready to

become tax-payers. Islam bas triumphed and the head of infidelity

has been laid low. If the Hanafi code of law had not saved the

Hindus from death by levying Jizyah, they would have been

annihilated root and branch."

Hindus continued fighting with steadfastness against the Jihad of

Islam. In the South, the two great Hindu warriors who had been

converted to Islam - Harihar and Bukka - were brought back into

the fold of Hinduism by Acharya Madhavaranya and they

established the Vijayanagara Empire. It was under the protection of

that Empire that Hindu Shastras were revived and Sayana's

commentaries on the Vedas were composed. That Empire halted

the storm of Islam for 250 years from advancing further south. But

no captain or thinker of that Empire tried to study Islam.

 63

Consequently, the number of Muslims went on increasing

continuously in the army of the Empire, and it was the treachery

practised by them in a decisive battle which destroyed that Empire.

It cannot be said that the rulers and thinkers of Vijayanagara, had

no knowledge of the criminal character of Islam. The queen of a

prince of Vijayanagara, Ganga Devi, had composed an epic named

Madhurii Vijayam at the end of the fourteenth century (CE). The

atrocities that had been committed by the Muslims during their

rule in Madhura (modem Madurai), are described by her as follows:

"Those vicious barbarians (mlechhas) mount attacks on the Hindu

Dharma every day. They break the idols of the gods and throwaway

the vessels of worship. They cast into fire the Srimadbhiigavata and

the other dharmagranthas (dharmic books), lick away the sandal

paste from the bodies of the Brahmins, urinate on the Tulasi plants

like dogs, deliberately defecate in the temples, gargle over the

Hindus engaged in worship, and terrorise Hindu saints. It appears

as if all these people have escaped from some lunatic asylum."

No thinker of Vijayanagara tried to search for the source of this

Muslim insanity. No one tried to know that in the scriptures of

Islam, gangsters of this type have not been censured as mad but
 64

hailed as Ghazis (great heroes). If some Hindu thinker had studied

the scriptures of Islam and perceived the behaviour pattern

prescribed in them, he would have warned his society that the

Hindus had to deal not with mad people but with gangsters

fanaticized by Islam. Thereafter, the Hindu society would have

perhaps discovered the remedy for this fanaticism.

In the scriptures of Islam, it is clearly stated that Islam is the only

and the final truth, and that anyone raising any sort of doubt as

regards that truth should be killed immediately. In this situation,

to say that the Hindu Dharma also had some truth in it was a

cardinal crime. Even so, Kabir, Nanak and some other Hindu saints

committed this 'crime'. They said it again and again that the Hindu

Dharma was as good for the Hindus as Islam was for the Muslims,

and that the attainment that was possible through Islam was

possible through the Hindu Dharma also. Now-a-days some people

say that Kabir and Nanak, by proclaiming Islam as a dharma, were

the first to spread that falsehood which later on proved disastrous.

There is some substance in this allegation. But viewing it in the

context of that period, it has to be admitted that this comparing of

the Hindu Dharma with Islam and describing the Hindu Dharma
 65

as equal to Islam, was an act of great courage. Kabir had to suffer

many torments at the hands of Sikandar Lodi for coming out with

that sort of courage. Guru Nanak escaped this treatment because,

in his period of preaching, the Muslim empire in India was once

again in decline and the attention of some subedar of Lahore or the

sultan of Delhi was not drawn towards him.

This indeed was the foremost achievement of the Hindu response to

the challenge of Islam, which was witnessed in the second phase of

Muslim imperialism. As a result of Hindu heroism, Muslim rule had

not been able to become firmly established. Now-a-days, a detailed

description of a few medieval Muslim empires is found in the

textbooks of history. But on taking a count of the duration of these

'empires', it becomes clear that, leaving aside the Mughal Empire,

no Muslim regime could stay in power for more than 20-30 years. It

was all due to repeated revolts staged by the Hindu Rajas and the

people in general, and their display of heroism. When Babur

invaded India, the most powerful kingdoms in the country were

those of Mewar and Vijayanagar. No sultan had the capacity to

wage war against Maharana Sanga and Krishnadeva Raya. The

Lodi 'emperor' at Agra had absolutely none.

 66

It this period, besides Hindu heroism, another development also

took place. The Hindu society stood together in spurning the

Muslims as untouchables. Most of the Muslims in India were those

who had been forcibly dragged or allured into the fold of Islam from

within the Hindu society. Many a time, it had also happened that

some families from a particular Hindu caste became Muslims for

some reason while the others continued to remain Hindus. But far

from sharing food or entering into marriage relations, Hindus and

Muslims of the same caste did not share even drinking water. To

shun even the shadow of a Muslim by regarding him an

untouchable, may be a controversial subject in the democratic and

socialistic age of today. But a society, caught in the clutches of

calamity, has to save itself in this manner, especially a society the

thought power of which has declined and which is engaged in

building its defenses by relying on its ancestral traditions.

It has to be admitted that sometimes the achievement of one age

becomes a liability in another age. And that is what happened in

this case. The trend of accepting Islam as a dharma, which some

Hindu saints had initiated in an earlier age, proved to be a very

great hurdle in the following age. Similarly, by regarding every

Muslim as untouchable, the Hindu society closed its doors for ever
 67

on those of its members who had been alienated from it by force or

allurement. If Islam had been identified ideologically by means of

study and intellectual analysis, the heroism and tenacity for

tradition displayed one day would not have boomeranged another

day.

Response in the Third Phase

The display of heroism by the Hindu nation succeeded in the long

run. By the time of Akbar, the Muslim invaders came to

understand that Hindus by and large could neither be made

Muslims by force nor suppressed for long. Consequently, Akbar

arrived at a compromise with the Hindus, and made the Rajputs

partners in the expansion of his empire. The Mughal Empire gained

much by this policy. But the Hindu nation also gained no less.

Akbar had rejected the system of administration ordained by Islam.

Cow slaughter was banned. Jiziyah, the tax payable by the Hindus

to a Muslim ruler for protection of life and property, was abolished.

Hindus could now visit their holy places without paying pilgrim tax.

A Hindu male could now marry a Muslim female without becoming

Muslim. Hindus also got the freedom to criticize Islam, and they

could point a finger even at the conduct of the prophet of Islam if

 68

they wished. At the _same time, any Hindu converted to Islam

obtained the right to return back to the Hindu society.

But the Hindus did not care to take advantage of this good

opportunity. Neither the Hindus married Muslim women, nor the

Hindus converted to Islam returned back to the Hindu society. No

indication is available from that period that any Hindu studied or

made any critical comments on Islam. What happened was only

this much that the Hindu society heaved a sigh of relief after

ceaseless strife for several hundred years.

On the other hand, the insistence of Hindu saints that the Hindu

Dharma is rich in all respects began to have some effect. During

Akbar's rule, Hindu Shastras came to be studied by some Muslims.

It was but natural that Muslim scholars determined the substance

of the Hindu Dharma by weighing it on the scales of Islam. And

that is what happened too. Monotheism and prophets were

searched in the Hindu Shastras. Obviously, this was not the proper

method to understand the Hindu Dharma. This meant that the

Hindu Dharma was being cast in the mould of Islam. But the fact

that some Muslims could do even this much during the days of
 69

their dominance, was not a small thing. Muslims like Rahim and

Raskhan went even further.

But there is such a dense darkness in the core of Islam that even a

single ray of light dazzles it. Having once closed its eyes towards

rationality and decent behaviour befitting human beings, it could

never open them again. After witnessing what happened during

Akbar's rule, the sufis and the ulema raised an alarm. And during

the time of Shah Jahan's rule, the grip of Islam began to be

tightened once again on the system of government. Aurangzeb

reversed the policy of Akbar cent per cent. Once again, the Hindu

was left with no option except war and heroism.

The rise of Samarth Ramadas took place in this period.

In this very period, Shivaji, the man who shaped the age, also took

birth. The Rajput sword was unsheathed in Rajasthan, and the

Sikh sword in the Punjab. All around Delhi, the Jats displayed

great heroism. The Bundelas rose up in the vales of Vindhyachal.

Aurangzeb could not overcome this storm. By the time he neared

his death, he felt completely defeated. The armies of the Marathas

had started challenging Mughal authority in Gujrat and Malwa

during the last days of his rule.

 70

Hardly fifty years had passed after the death of Aurangzeb, when

Muslim rule in India drew towards its end. Now the Marathas were

the mightiest power in India. The Mughal 'emperor' at Delhi was

dependent on their mercy. But for want of the power of thought,

the Hindus lost the game once again. The Marathas did not wipe

out Islam when they had the opportunity. The power of Islam at

this time was centred in the hands of those few whose ancestors

had come into India as foreign invaders or as their servitors. These

people called themselves Arabs, Turks, Mughals, Iranians etc., and

looked down upon the common Muslims who were converts from

the Hindu society. The need of the time was that the Hindu society

threw open its doors to the native converts, and either expelled the

foreign Muslims from India or pulled out their fangs full of the

poison of Islam. But what happened was the exact opposite. The

Marathas and Sikhs tried to make friends with the foreign Nawabs

and Amirs descended from Muslim invaders, and disregarded the

native converts to Islam. It was proved in the Third Battle of

Panipat as to who was with whom. But by then, the opportune time

had passed. The foreign Muslims first sought the help of Ahmad

Shah Abdali and, thereafter, took shelter under the British. Even

now, Hindu society, was sitting tight with its doors closed on the .
 71

native Muslims. At the same time, this society did not tire of

proclaiming that Islam was as great a dharma as the Hindu

Dharma.

The British invasion progressed in India and, after the Great

Rebellion of 1857, it settled down firmly. The propagation of this lie

is very widespread that the leaders of the Rebellion were Muslims.

The British themselves had spread this lie. It is true that, among

the leaders of the Rebellion, there were some Muslim Nawabs,

particularly in the region known as Uttar Pradesh today. But the

British themselves had made a count of the soldiers who had

displayed heroism during the Rebellion. Their statistics tell us that,

among those soldiers, the number of Hindus was many times more

than that of the Muslims. Among the leaders of the Rebellion also,

the valour of Tantia Tope, Rani Lakshmi Bai, and Kunwar Singh,

exceeded by far the exploits of any Muslim Nawab. Hindu leaders,

however, kept on invoking the name of the Mughal 'emperor'. On

the other hand, the Muslims also convinced themselves that the

British had grabbed power to rule India from the Muslim empire. If

the Marathas had unfurled the saffron flag over Delhi in due time

by kicking away the Mughal skeleton, this lie would not have

gained any support at a later stage.

 72

This lie bore fruit in the last quarter of the nineteenth century,

when the freedom movement against British imperialism took birth.

Prior to this, many waves of social reforms and cultural awakening

had surged forward in Hindu society. The founder of the Arya

Samaj, Maharshi Dayananda, had proclaimed that Islam was no

dharma but only a subterfuge of blind beliefs. Having witnessed

this new and brightened face of the Hindu nation, the remnants of

Musiim imperialism, that is, the foreign Muslims, were already

perturbed. Now, on hearing another tune from the same nation,

they became terribly frightened. These remnants of Muslim

imperialism were flourishing under the protection of British

imperialism. Suddenly, they raised a hue and cry and began to

bewail, "The Muslim nation which was the ruling race till yesterday,

cannot accept a status of equality with the Hindu nation which was

in attendance on the Muslims till the other day." At the same time,

these remnants began to hurl threats that the Muslim race also

knew how to wield the sword, which the Hindu Banias were

incapable of doing. But a close look at this self-adulation, revealed

how terribly frightened these remnants of Muslim imperialism

were. That was why they were praying with one voice that the white
 73

masters should not introduce any democratic institutions in India,

and never leave the land.

The need of the time was that the freedom struggle which the

leaders of the country were waging, should have had a two-pronged

strategy. The freedom movement had to battle not only against

British imperialism, but also against the remnants of Muslim

imperialism. The struggle against Muslim imperialism had been

going on since the thirteenth century (CE). The Vijayanagara

Empire, Rana Sanga and Maharana Pratap had made great

contributions to that long-drawn-out war. Its tide had been turned

by the diplomatic as well as the military skill of Chhatrapati

Shivaji. This struggle had remained unfinished because of the

intervention of British imperialism. Now that old struggle had to be

resumed and led to its successful conclusion. But this was not

done, and Islam became a problem for the country once again. The

only reason for this sorry outcome was that, by accepting Islam as

a dharma, the Muslims had been given the status of a religious

minority.

In the Swadeshi Movement which surged forward after the partition

of Bengal, the battle being fought against the British had been
 74

linked with the battles fought earlier against Muslim imperialism.

But only for a brief period. The proclamation of Maharshi

Dayananda that Islam was no dharma, was also reechoed at some

places for some days. But not with self-confidence. Consequently,

the suffocation which pervaded the political and cultural

atmosphere, could not be cleared. On the other hand, having

witnessed the rising tempo of the freedom movement, Muslim

leaders hatched a conspiracy to use the movement for serving the

interests of Pan-Islamism and extended their hand for cooperation

against the British rule. The leaders of the nation became

convinced that the mentality of the Muslims had changed, and that

the traitors of yesterday had become patriots of today. Hence, in

1916, the Lucknow Pact was signed by Lokamanya Tilak on behalf

of the Indian National Congress. The Pact conceded all the

communal demands that had been made by the Muslim leader till

then. The way Islam rode on the back of the freedom movement

during the Khilafat movement was a clear indication that the

leaders of the nation had not understood the real character of

Islam, and, consequently, would not be able to defeat the designs of

Islam. Some thinkers like Sri Aurobindo, Sarat Chandra Chatterji

and Lala Lajpat Rai, had issued a warning that the strategy of the
 75

freedom movement be formulated after a proper study of Islam.

Veer Savarkar and Dr. Hedgewar had come forward to defeat the

designs of Islam. But Gandhi's slogan of sarva-dharma-samabhiiva,

had sent the country into a deep slumber. Once again, the Muslims

co-operated with the British imperialism. All the sacrifices in the

freedom movement were made by the Hindu society, but by staging

streets riots from time to time and by issuing threats of widespread

bloodshed, Islam partitioned the country. If it had been understood

in due time that Islam was no dharma but only a political doctrine

of imperialism, it might have saved the country from the frightful

outcome.

Response in the Fourth Phase

After partition, independent India resolved to follow four basic

policies - democracy, socialism, secularism or sarva-dharma-

samabhiiva, and non-alignment. In principle, all the four policies

were unobjectionable. But the remnants of Muslim imperialism in

India, perverted the meaning of all four. Being irked by that

perversion, some people have started opposing these policies in

principle.
 76

Some of the remnants of Muslim imperialism migrated to Pakistan

after independence. But a section of them stayed in India and

began to look for a new opportunity. A majority of this section

joined the ruling Congress Party, and 'started utilizing their

positions for the service of Islam. Some of them joined the

Communist Party, and began to advance the designs of Islam

behind the smoke-screen of progressivism. And the rest, who

entered various other political parties, began to get their support

for Islamic causes. Party may be any, the goal to be achieved was

the same - to secure the victory of Islam over the remaining part of

India as well. The old Muslim organizations - Jamaat-i-Islami,

Muslim League, Ittihad-ul-Musalmin, Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Hind -

continued functioning as before.

The only difference that came about was that those people who,

before partition, had proclaimed, with great pride and red-shot

eyes, the Muslims as a separate nation in the name of religion,

history and culture and threatened large-scale bloodshed in order

to have their way, now started raising cries of distress that the new

policies of India were not being implemented in right earnest. It was

the same old theme. Only the manner of presenting it had changed.
 77

Invoking democracy, these people began to ask as to what sort of

democracy was this in which a large section of the people (Muslims)

did not get due representation in parliamentary institutions,

government administration, the armed forces, and the police, etc.

Invoking socialism, these people began to ask as to what sort of

socialism was this in which all the means of production and

distribution were in the hands of the high caste Hindus, and in

which the poor Muslims - destitute, downtrodden and exploited in

every way - did not get sufficient food to fill their bellies and clothes

to cover their bodies?

Invoking the policy of secularism or sarva-dharma-samabhava,

these people began to ask as to what sort of secularism was this in

which all the government institutions and the media continued

spreading the Hindu religion and culture, and the foremost

champions of which went on pilgrimage to Hindu temples? And

what sort of sarva-dharma-samabhava was this in which the

Muslim religion and culture got no protection, and in which a

leading language like Urdu was neglected?

Invoking the policy of non-alignment, these people began to ask as

to what sort of non-alignment was this in which the sentiments of a

 78

large section of the nation were ignored and the imperialistic

aggression of Israel against the Arab nations was not opposed, and

in -which the interests of international Islam and of the Muslim

nations found no place?

If someone pointed out to these invokers of democracy, socialism

and secularism that they should also criticize those Muslim

countries where not even the slightest trace of these policies could

be detected, then all the Muslim leaders started shouting with one

voice - What have we got to do with those foreign countries? We are

only talking of India and of the policies adopted by India. If

someone pointed out that if you really have nothing to do with

foreign countries, then why do you feel concerned about

happenings in the Muslim countries or with the policies pursued by

the other nations towards them, why do you go on holding

meetings and taking out processions and pressurizing the

government of India for supporting the Muslim nations, why do you

stage street riots against the Hindus whenever something

distasteful to you happens in some Muslim country or the other?,

then all the Muslim leaders began to shout with one voice - all the

Muslims of the world are indivisible parts of the one millat (Muslim
 79

fraternity), and Islam does not accept that any Muslim is only the

citizen of the country where he resides.

If someone pointed out that you invoke secularism or sarva-

dharma-samabhava but in the scriptures of Islam, there is no place

at all for secularism or any religion other than Islam, then all the

Muslim leaders began to shout with one voice - you are the

followers of secularism or sarva-dharma-samabhiiva, not we; Islam

does not allow entertainment of any such principle; therefore, this

principle is not applicable to us; but, because you proclaim this

principle, you cannot make any critical comment on Islam.

The vote-hungry political parties either kept quiet or agreed with

the Muslim leaders. The Communists had equipped the Muslims

with a weapon even before partition - whoever says that the

demands of the Muslims are improper, or holds their complaints

baseless, or raises a critical voice about Islam, or talks of protection

for the Hindu dharma, culture and society, is a narrow-minded

communalist with a fascist bent, a reactionary and blood-thirsty

demon. The Muslims kept on using this weapon after partition also.

The influence of the Communist ideology had had a deep impact on

the ruling Congress Party right from the time of Pandit Nehru's
 80

supremacy. That Party also echoed the howl of the Communists

and Muslims. And, gradually, all political parties became panic-

stricken lest the Muslims get offended and issue a fatwa against

them. A competition started among political parties for displaying

the Muslims who were party members, the prominent party posts

that the Muslims held, the number of Muslim candidates who were

given tickets at the time of elections, and the demands of the

Muslims that were included in the election manifesto.

This process was in progress when the wailing Muslims suddenly

began to roar. The Muslim countries in the Middle East had

decided to test their oil reserves as a political weapon. The blow of

that weapon was felt by all nations for some time. But all the others

recovered before long. Only India reeled under that blow. Many

international Muslim organizations began to proclaim that the

destiny of Islam had taken a turn due to the blessings of Allah, and

that the unfinished task of Islam in India must be finished. At the

same time, fabulous funds began to be made available to the

Muslims of India by the oil-rich Muslim countries. It need not be

detailed here as to the uses being made of that money. Only those

people have failed to see or hear or understand the current Islamic

 81

agenda in India who, because of their Communist or some other

traitorous vision, harbor an anti-Hindu animus.

But this time a new response is corning forth from the Hindu

society. A section of the Hindu intelligentsia and some Hindu

organizations have not only drawn the attention of the Hindu

society towards this new challenge of Islam, but also proclaimed

that this aggression of Islam shall not be allowed to continue any

longer. There are ample proofs that the new response is drawing

attention of the Hindus at large. The Hindu society is now ready to

hear that Islam is not a dharma but a totalitarian and imperialistic

dogma which, by misusing the language of religion, throws dust in

the eyes of others. This new voice of the nation has not yet become

loud and clear; the leaders of the nation are still speaking in a

subdued voice. But it can now be hoped that the day is not far off

when the Hindu society will declare firmly that the imperialistic

rule of Islam has disappeared, and that now there is no place for

Islam in this country. That day will be the beginning of a Great

Yajna which will stand completed only when all parts of the Hindu

homeland occupied by Islam and all members of the Hindu society

alienated from it by that ideology, will rejoin the motherland and

 82

the national mainstream. (See Appendices 1 and 2 for the national

vision that is emerging.)

 83

Appendix -1

The Emerging National Vision

Speech delivered by Sita Ram Goel on Sunday the 4th December,

1983, at the Yogakshema monthly meeting at Calcutta.

Dr. Dhar, Mr. Ghosh and Friends, *

What Mr. Ghosh has said about me has added to my diffidence

which was there from the very beginning because I am not used to

public speaking. I do not know if I am a good writer at all. But I

know it for sure that I am a very poor speaker. You will, therefore,

forgive me if I am somewhat slipshod, if I become abrupt and

incoherent at times.

In fact, it would have been in the fitness of things if the speaker

today had been our friend Sri Ram Swarup, because whatever I

have written and whatever I have to say today really comes from

him. He gives me the seed-ideas which sprout into my articles, long

and short. He gives me the perspective. He gives me the framework

of my thought. Only the language is mine. The language also would

have been much better if it was his own. My language becomes

sharp at times; it annoys people. He has a way of saying things in a

 84

firm but polite manner, which discipline I have never been able to

acquire. I wonder if he will be able to add some comments at the

end of this meeting.

Now, coming to the subject of today, that is, the Emerging National

Vision, I feel that perhaps it is presumptuous on my part to speak

about the National Vision before an audience from Bengal,

particularly before an audience from this city of Calcutta. It was in

this land of Bengal, it was in this city of Calcutta in the opening

decades of this century that we ob¬tained a clear picture of the

National Vision. You have only to read the works of Bankim

Chandra, Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo and listen to the songs

of Rabindranath in order to know what that National Vision was, as

also to understand what that Vision is likely to be when it revives

and is reaffirm¬ed. I have nothing to add to what these great men

have written and expounded and what they have shown in their

own lives. I am only a poor interpreter of their Vision as it should

unfold, as it should emerge in the present situation.

The National Vision which was expounded by these great men rose

to its heights, reached a high watermark, attained its acme in the

Swadeshi Movement. The same imperialist forces, that is, Islamic

 85

imperialism (or the residues of Islamic imperial¬ism) and British

imperialism, had combined to partition Bengal, to partition a land

which God had made one. But at that time, the conspiracy was

frustrated. The game was defeat¬ed because the National Vision

was very clear, very firm. In fact, the Swadeshi Movement was the

beginning in real earnest of the National Struggle for Freedom

which was earlier confined to some distinguished people meeting

together and passing a number of resolutions. It was for the first

time that India witnessed in the history of the freedom movement a

mass mobilization of her people. The echoes of the Swadeshi

Movement were heard far and wide, all over India, particularly in

Maharashtra and the Punjab, as also the mantras that were given

during the Swadeshi Movement - the mantra of Swa¬deshi, the

mantra of Swarajya, the mantra of Vande Mataram which pulsated

with all the aspirations of an awakened nation. That was a

complete picture of the National Vision as it had to be.

But, unfortunately, in the hands of the latter-day leadership, in the

later phases of the freedom struggle, that Vision got diluted. It was
 86

obscured by certain other visions. It lost its clarity and the result

was the tragedy of partition. We know what happened and how the

events unfolded. Bengal has suffered the most due to that tragedy.

The wounds which Bengal has suffered and which have now

become running sores - well, I do not have to dwell on the subject.

You know it all. I have only to point out, it is my painful duty to

point out, that this land of Bengal which has suffered so much due

to the loss of the National Vision, has neglected that Vision to a

greater extent than the rest of this country. It is, therefore, the duty

of Bengal to resurrect that Vision, to recover that Vision, to reaffirm

that Vision, and thus reclaim its lost leadership of India.

Bengal today feels neglected. But the fault is not of the rest of

India. The fault lies with Bengal itself. Bengal has neglected its own

heritage. Bengal has ignored its own Vision which it had once given

to the whole of India and which, in turn, had given to Bengal the

leadership of India. I need not go into details. You know what is

happening in Bengal today. It is not only the perspective but also

the personal character of its great men which is being questioned.

As I read the various debates going on in the Bengali press, in

Bengali novels and other writings, I am really pained. How can

 87

things go down to such a low level in a land which had once raised

India to such great

heights?

What was that National Vision which these great men gave

us and which inspired India to launch such a great struggle for

freedom? Remember the revolutionaries which India produced at

that time. They were great men and women, those revolutionaries

who mounted the gallows with the Gita in hand and with Vande

Mataram on their lips. They were not like the latter-day

revolutionaries. I can say with a full sense of responsibility that

quite a few of the latter-day revolutionaries sound like ordinary

criminals. The earlier revolutionaries were

of a different character because their Vision was of a different

character.

What was that Vision? In a way, it was nothing new. It was only a

restatement in modern language, in a modern setting, of the

ancient Vedic Vision as unfolded in the Vedas, in the Upanishads,

in the Jainagama, in the Tripitaka, in the Ramayana and the

Mahabharata, in the Puranas, in the Dharmashastras, and in the

 88

latter-day poetry of saints and siddhas. We have had countless

spokesmen of that Vision throughout our history ..

The first dimension of that Vision was that India was the land of

Sanatana Dharma. That was the first and foremost point of that

Vision. In fact, Sri Aurobindo had said in his Uttarpara Speech that

India would rise with the rise of Sanatana Dharma, that India

would sink if Sanatana Dharma sank, and that India would die if it

were at all possible for Sanatana Dharma to die. This is not the

occasion for me to talk about Sanatana Dharma. All I want to say is

that Sanatana Dharma is a natural religion, that it is in harmony

with the development of human nature, with the growth of human

aspirations. It is not something artificial like Christianity and

Islam. It is not a set of mechanical beliefs constructed by the outer

mind of man and imposed upon its followers.

The second dimension of that Vision was that of a vast and

variegated culture. According to iidhiira and adhikiira, the various

sections of our population, various segments of our society, various

regions of our country, developed their own culture, developed their

own art, developed their own liter¬ature. We have a vast literature -

sacred, secular and scientific - which grew in different regions of

 89

this country, in different social and cultural surroundings. We have

a lot of art and liter¬ature. But its spirit is the spirit of Sanatana

Dharma. It is informed by Sanatana Dharma in all its details. That

was the second dimension of that National Vision.

The third dimension of that Vision was that this great society, the

society which we describe as Hindu society today,

56 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION was reared on the basis of spirituality, on the basis

of Sanatana Dharma, on the basis of a great culture created by

Sanatana Dharma. The Varnashrama Dharma which has shaped

this great society has been corrupted today into a single English

phrase - the Caste System which everybody is busy accus~ng of all

sorts of crimes. But it was Varnashrama Dharma WhICh created a

complex social system that has survived till today with vitality and

vigour, in spite of all vicissitudes of fortune, in spite of so many

foreign invasions, throughout these count¬less ages. Varnashrama

Dharma has been defended by all our great men in recent times. It

was defended by Swami Daya¬nanda, it was defended by Bankim

 90

Chandra, it was defended by Vivekananda, it was defended by

Mahatma Gandhi, by Madan Mohan Malaviya, by Lokamanya

Tilak. All these great men have been unanimous that Varnashrama

Dharma has saved Hindu society from destruction - the destruction

which overtook so many societies outside India at the hands of

Christianity, Islam and Communism. That was the third dimension

of that National Vision.

The fourth dimension of that National Vision was that this great

society, this Hindu society, had a history of its own - .a history of

how this society arose, how it developed, how It created a

spirituality which was akin to the spirituality of many ancient

nations like Greece, Rome, China, Egypt, Persia. We were told that

the history of India was the history of Hindu society, of Hindu

culture, of Hindu spirituality, that it was the history of the Hindu

nation and not the history of foreign invaders as we are being

taught today. That was the fourth dimension of that National

Vision.

And the last dimension which these great men stressed, which they

affirmed again and again, was that this land of Bharatavarsha was

one indivisible whole; that it was the cradle of Hindu society, of

 91

Hindu culture, of Hindu spirituality; that it was the homeland of

the Hindu nation; and that other com¬munities were welcome to

live in this land provided they came to terms with Hindu society

and Hindu culture. They did not

think in terms of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Hindustan and

Bangladesh. Today Bharatavarsha stands divided into several units

which are not only politically but also culturally hostile to each

other and we seem to have become reconciled to that division. But

the Vision that was given to us by our great men was that of

Bharatavarsha as an indivisible whole, not only geographically but

also culturally. That Vision rose before us during the Swadeshi

Movement, in the first decade of this century.

There were some other visions also, struggling for suprem¬acy at

the same time. Those other visions had an advantage on their side

because of the educational system provided by the British, imposed

on us by the British. This was the same educational system which

we have in this country today. This educational system has been

sponsoring and spreading those other visions of India.

There was the vision of Islamic imperialism. It said that India like

pre-Islamic Arabia and pre-Islamic Persia and like so many other

 92

ancient lands conquered by Islam, was a land of darkness. It said

that India had to be brought to the "light" of Islam, converted into a

dar aI-Islam.

Later on, another vision was provided by Christian imperialism. It

also said that India was a land of darkness, of heathenism, of

paganism, of unbelievers. It said that the "light" of Christianity had

to be brought to India, that India had to be converted into a land of

Christ.

A third vision came to us in the shape of the White man's burden.

This vision shared somethings of the crusading zeal of Islamic and

Christian imperialism. But it spoke in the language of rationalism

and humanism. It spoke in an enlightened language. It said that

India was a land of poor, illiterate, down¬trodden, exploited and

emasculated human beings who had to be given bread, who had to

be educated, who had to be given health, who had to be given some

sort of self-confidence by the British mentors or by Western culture

imported from this foreign country or that.

 93

Later still, another imperialist vision came from the West in the

shape of Communism. This vision said that India was a colonial

and semi-colonial society, divided into exploiting and exploited

classes, into the oppressors and the oppressed, and that it was the

duty of the Communist Party to liberate India from all this sloth

and exploitation, this deadening of the forces of production. This

was the fourth imperialist vision of India.

The cumulative effect of all these imperialist visions combining

together has been rather serious, rather disastrous for us. Today

the vision that prevails, particularly amongst our ruling classes,

amongst the Hindu intellectuals, amongst the Hindu elite, is quite

the opposite of the National Vision provided by the Swadeshi

Movement, provided by our own great men.

Today we are told that Bharatavarsha is not one indivisible whole,

that it is not one country. We are told that India is a subcontinent

and that its division that has taken place into Afghanistan,

Pakistan, Hindustan and Bangladesh is the natural outcome of

various nationalities struggling for their own pieces of homeland.

As a result, India can no more be claimed a~ its own homeland by

any particular society, least of all by the Hindu society.

 94

Then we are told that the history of this subcontinent is not the

history of Hindu society, of the Hindu nation. This country is now

regarded as some sort of a dharmashiilii into which all sorts of

invaders have poured in from the West and the East and other

directions. The history of India has become the history of foreign

invaders. So when you look at the teaching of history in our

universities, colleges and schools, you find that there is an ancient

Hindu period, you find that there is a medieval Muslim period, and

you find that there is a modern British period. Now we are also

informed of a contemporary period, the post-independence period,

with its own architect and father.

N ext we are told that-Indian society is not a homogenous

society. India, we are told, is multi-racial, multinational, multi-

linguistic and multi many other things. We are also told that Indian

culture is not Hindu culture, that it is a composite culture made

out of many cultures, indigenous and imported. It makes me laugh

sometimes. When we talk of Indian music, we find that it is Hindu

music. When we talk of Indian sculpture, we find that it is Hindu

sculpture. When we talk of Indian architecture, we find that it is

Hindu architecture except for a few minor details added by foreign

 95

invaders. Indian literature, almost ninety-nine percent of it, is

Hindu literature. All this is Hindu heritage. It was the Hindus who

created it, it is the Hindus who have sustained it. It is the Hindus

who are still adding to it, elaborating it and expanding it. Yet, when

it is pointed out that the culture of this country is Hindu culture

and that the history of this culture is Hindus history, everyone

seems to get annoyed. People who talk of Hindu culture are

accused of being communalists.

But the strangest thing that has happened is that the religion of

this country is no more Sanatana Dharma. Sanatana Dharma is

now supposed to be some sort of a primitive superstition. Some

people take up Vedanta and talk a lot about it. Some others take

up the Gita and talk about the Gita. Some others take up and talk

about other aspects of Sanatana Dharma, Yoga and so on. They

acquire name and fame, write books and give lectures. But when it

is pointed out that it was Sanatana Dharma which created all this

spirituality, all this philosophy, all these laws, all this culture, not

many people are prepared to accept it. A new religion has taken the

place of Sanatana Dharma. This new religion is Secularism.

 96

We are now told that it will be through Secularism that India will

become a united nation, that there will be national integration on

the basis of Secularism. So we have a National Integration Council.

It gives instructions to the Ministry of Education that the history of

India should be rewritten so that Muslim invaders of this country

are not regarded as foreigners, so that Islamic imperialism is not

regarded as something

obnoxious, as something foreign, as something which came from

outside. We are now required to accept Islam as an Indian religion,

as a religion which must have as much pride of place in India as

her own Sanatana Dharma. The logic has not yet been extended to

the so-called British period of our history. But tomorrow there may

be voices which demand that the Brit¬ish should not be regarded

as invaders and injurers because, after all, they gave us English

education, English literature, hospitals, schools, colleges, roads

and all sorts of modern paraphernalia.

This is the state of things that is now prevailing in this country.

The National Vision which had arisen during the Swadeshi

 97

Movement, which had mobilized the masses in India and which had

taken her ahead in the fight for freedom, is now more or less

completely eclipsed. It is not so much eclipsed elsewhere in India

as in Bengal or in Kerala or in certain other parts where English

education has spread faster than in other places. This is the

situation that obtains today.

Let us take Secularism. It is a concept which we have imported

from modern Europe. The Christian Church had created a lot of

bloodshed in Europe, 100 years wars and 200 years wars. A dark

night had descended over Europe with the coming of Christianity.

Humanism, rationalism, universalism and all other values which

are known as human values had been buried under the dead

weight of Christianity. Some people in Europe started questioning

the character of Christi¬anity, particularly the stranglehold of the

Church over the State. There was a revival of humanism,

rationalism and universal¬ism due to Europe's contact with India,

China and some other great ancient civilizations. There was a

struggle against the Christian Church and over a period of time the

State was freed from its stranglehold. It was this struggle which

gave birth to the concept of Secularism in Europe. It was a very

healthy concept, particularly for those countries which were

 98

suffering under the yoke of theoc.racy, under the inhuman theology

of Christianity. This is still a very healthy concept for countries

suffering under the yoke of Islam.

But in India today people prescribe Secularism to Hindu society

which has never known any religious conflicts, which has never

known any religious strife. Recently I was travelling in the Far East

and met some Buddhist monks from China. I said to them:

"Buddhism came to China from outside. But you had ancient

religions of your own. You had Confucianism. You had Taoism. Did

Buddhism come in conflict with Confucianism, or Taoism? " They

said: "No, never." There was not a single instance of conflict

because Confucianism also came from the same deepest source of

the Spirit, because Taoism also came from the same source from

which Sanatana Dharma springs, from which Jainism springs,

from which Vaishnavism springs. All these are different names of

the same spiritual message for mankind. I also talked to some

people in Japan in order to find out if Buddhism came in conflict

with Shintoism which is their ancient religion. They also said, no,

the two religions never came into conflict. The two religions are co-

existing in mutual harmony till today. I met a taxi driver who was

quite an intelligent man. He said: "I am both a Shintoist and a

 99

Buddhist." So also in ancient Greece, in ancient Rome, in the whole

ancient world, all over Asia and Europe. The world had never

known any religious wars before the rise of Christianity.

Religious wars started with the coming of Christianity. They

became very, very bloody with the rise of Islam. But Europe had a

wave of humanism, rationalism and universalism which broke the

stranglehold of Christianity over the State. That is how the concept

of Secularism arose. As I have said, it was a very healthy concept in

the context of Europe. As a result of it, European society has

travelled so far, European science has developed, European

technology has developed, and the social welfare system for the

people of Europe has improved. All these things have come out of

the concept of Secularism.

Hindu society, however, has always been a naturally secular

society. Hindu society has never known any theocratic state. You

take for instance any Hindu king. You will never find a bigot who

favoured this or that sect. Personally he may

 100

have belonged to Buddhism or Jainism or Vaishnavism or any

other sect. But in his court, in his kingdom, all religions were

equally welcome, all religions were equally patronised. In fact, it

was the religious people who patronised the king rather than being

patronised by him. It was not like the Archbishop of Canterbury

who has to wait on the king of England, the king being Defender of

the Faith. The Hindu king had to go to rishis, munis and sadhus in

order to seek their advice.

It is in such a land, in such a society that the concept of

Secularism has been imported from Europe. Not only that. The

concept of Secularism has also been turned against Hindu society.

Today you know what Secularism means. Whenever the word

'secularism' is uttered, you can sense an anti-Hindu animus.

Secularism in India today means denunciation of Hindu society,

denunciation of Hindu culture, denunciation of Hindu history. It

means denunciation of everything which is Hindu. The word

'Hindu' itself has become a dirty word. In the language of India's

Secularism, Muslims are a minority, Christians are a minority. But

the Hindus are a "brute" majority. This is the religion of Secularism

which is replacing Sanatana Dharma. This is the new vision which

has replaced the vision of Sanatana Dharma, the vision of a society

 101

and a culture and a history and other things based on Sanatana

Dharma.

The excesses of this Secularism, its anti-Hindu animus, have

gradually led to a widespread feeling among the Hindus that there

is something seriously wrong somewhere. The so¬called minorities

have become more and more aggressive under the protection of this

Secularism. The Christian mission¬aries bring billions of dollars

into this country from the De¬fence and Intelligence and other

departments of the govern¬ments in Western countries. They spend

this mammoth fin¬ance for building missions and churches and for

making converts. The "light" of Christianity is being spread. So also

Islam. Ever since petrodollars have come into play, ever since the

Arab nations have b~come rich, Islam in India which had got a

little frightened after the partition in 1947, has re-

acquired its old self-confidence of the Muslim League days. You

have only to read the language press of Islam, particularly the Urdu

press, to witness the wave of aggressive self-confid¬ence on which

Islamic imperialism is riding at present.

 102

It is due to all these circumstances, due to this seeing through

Secularism, due to a renewed aggression from the old imperialist

forces which were lying dormant for some time,

. that Hindu society has experienced some sort of reawakening,

some sort of resurgence. We find that Vishwa Hindu Parishad is

playing a leading fole in consolidating this resurgence, in giving

leadership to this resurgence. But I feel that this effort will not get

completed, will not acquire a strong core unless the National Vision

of the Swadeshi Movement days is recovered, resurrected,

reaffirmed and reinterpreted in the new situation. This is what I am

trying to do today in my own small measure.

The first thing we have to do to reassert the National Vision, is to

proclaim to the whole world, without any fear or hesita¬tion, that

this ancient land, this Bharatavarsha is one indi¬visible whole and

that we do not recognise its partition into Afghanistan, Pakistan,

Hindustan and Bangladesh. It has often happened in the history of

many countries that certain imperi¬alist forces have encroached

upon them and have run away with some parts of their lands. We

must be very clear in our minds that what are known as

Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh today are parts of the Hindu

 103

homeland and that we are going to reclaim them. We should say it

fearlessly that the consolidation of Islamic imperialism, a thousand

years of Is¬lamic aggression against India, in the shape of

Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh is not going to be tolerated,

that sooner or later we shall undo this division of the motherland,

and that we shall reclaim our brethren who have been alien¬ated

from us by Islamic imperialism.

Some of our people are now known as Muslims, some are known as

Christians. All these are our own people. We have nothing against

them. But we shall not tolerate imperialism surviving in this

country in the form of Islam or in the form of

64 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION Christianity. Islamic imperialism has been defeated

and dispersed. There is no place for Islam in India today. Christian

imperialism has been defeated and dispersed. There is no place for

Christianity in India today. We have to say it all in very clear terms.

 104

The second thing which we should say very clearly and fearlessly,

is that the history of India is the history of Hindu society, of the

Hindu nation, and that we do not recognise any Muslim or British

period of this history. We do not recognise any age of Mamluks or

Khiljis or Tughlaqs or Lodis or Mughals. We shall instead read our

history in terms of our own heroes, in terms of an age of Prithvi Raj

Chauhan, an age of Rana Sanga, an age of Krishnadevaraya, an

age of Rana Pratap, an age of Shivaji, and so on. We shall not

concede that there ever was a Muslim empire in India. We shall

instead interpret that period as a long-drawn-out war of national

resistance, of national liberation, in which Islamic imperialism was

worsted. Similarly, we shall not recognise any British viceroys or

governors-general except as imperialist intruders. The imperialist

versions of Indian history which are being taught at present in our

schools and colleges, have to go.

Take the case of the so-called Muslim empire in India.

Within a few years of its prophet's death, Islam had conquered

large chunks of Asia and Africa. But it took it 70 long years to put

its first step in India, another 500 years to reach Delhi, and a few

hundred years more to reach South India, Soon after, Islamic

 105

imperialism started retreating before a national struggle for

liberation. It started folding up with the rise of Shivaji. So what we

had was a long-drawn-out war, a prolonged national struggle

against Islamic imperialism. This war, this national struggle should

not be described as the Muslim conquest of India or as the Muslim

period of Indian history.

The third thing which we have to proclaim in order to reaffirm the

National Vision, is that the national culture of India is Hindu

culture, the culture of Sanatana Dharma. It is a vast and

variegated culture. But at the same time, it is a culture

THE EMERGING NATIONAL VISION / 65

which is natural to mankind. There is nothing artificial about this

culture, nothing which has been constructed by the outer mind of

man, nothing which has been imposed by force as is the case with

the cultures of Christianity and Islam and Commun¬ism. Any

culture which is not prepared to come to terms with Hindu culture,

the culture of Sanatana Dharma, has to go. There is no place for

any alien culture to flourish on the soil of India in the name of

'minority rights'.
 106

The fourth thing which we have to proclaim, is that Hindu society

is the national society in India. This is a vast society which has

permitted endless expressions of human nature, which has

sanctioned all types of social traditions. Today we are accused of

neglecting our so-called tribals. This is an accusation which is

made against us very often. But when you read Hindu history, you

find that we never interfered with the life-style of any segment of

our society. We wrote 40 Dharma¬shastras in order to

accommodate the customs and traditions and institutions of

various regions and communities. Then we wrote 4000

commentaries on the Dharmashastras adapting them to different

jatis, to different varfJas, to different regions. So Hindu society is a

vast and complex society. Any commun¬ity which is not prepared

to come to terms with Hindu society has no place in India any

more. We shall not permit such alien communities to call

themselves minorities and claim special rights and privileges.

Finally, we have to proclaim that the only religion which Hindu

society recognises, which has a place in Bharatavarsha, is the

natural spirituality of Sanatana Dharma. It is a religion which

accommodates all types of human aspirations including atheism,

agnosticism, materialism. What it cannot accom¬modate is force

 107

and fraud practised in the name of religion. Any religion which

wants to flourish in India has to come to terms with the spirituality

of Sanatana Dharma. There is no place in India today for ideologies

like Islam and Christianity which harbour imperialist ambitions.

This, then, is the Emerging National Vision. The whole of

Bharatavarsha is the Hindu homeland. The history of Bharata-

varsha is the history of Hindu society. The national culture of

Bharatavarsha is Hindu culture. And the national religion of India

is Sanatana Dharma. This is the National Vision which we have to

reaffirm.

There are certain implications of this affirmation which we should

hold clearly before our minds. Unless we are clear in our minds,

unless we are ideologically equipped, unless we acquire knowledge

about ourselves as well as about the forces against which we have

to fight, the contest will be decided to our disadvantage. Several

ideological aggressions have been mounted against Hindu society,

against Hindu culture, against Sanatana Dharma in the past as

 108

well as in the present. There is the ideological aggression from

Christianity. There is the ideological aggression from Islam. There

is the ideological aggression from Communism. We have taken a

defensive posture against all these aggressions. This will not do.

Today in India, a Hindu has only one parichaya, only one name by

which he is known. He is known as a communalist. Islamic

ideology, Christian ideology, Communist ideology ¬all of them have

made such inroads that a Hindu is being called a communalist in

his own homeland. This is the ninth or the tenth wonder of the

world. I do not know how many wonders there are in the world at

present. But this is surely the greatest wonder of the world. This

has happened because Hindus in their ignorance have recognised

Islam and Chris-tianity as religions. This recognition has to be

withdrawn. This is the first implication of the Emerging National

Vision.

Today, by pretending that they are religions, Christianity and Islam

are claiming special rights, special privileges, special protection.

Take the case of Islam. Its holy books are full of calls for crusades

and mass slaughter. Its history has been blood-soaked. Its

mosques have always been party offices and arsenals. Yet it

 109

pretends that it is a religion. I am not going into the deeper reasons

for not regarding Islam and Christianity as religions. The simple

fact that both of them divide humanity into mutually exclusive

camps of believers

THE EMERGING NATIONAL VISION / 67

and unbelievers, Kafirs and Momins, is sufficient to prove that they

are not religions but only political ideologies. They have to be

rejected outright. No matter how many libraries have been

equipped in defence of these ideologies, no matter how many tons

of dogmatics, polemics and apologetics have been marshalled, we

have to reject them. We have to proclaim from the housetops that

we do not recognise Christianity and Islam as religions.

But we shall not acquire this courage unless we are con¬vinced of

the truth of what we have to say. And conviction will not come to

us unless we study these so-called religions in depth. I have had an

opportunity to study Islam and Christian¬ity under the guidance of

Sri Ram Swarup who has a deep knowledge of their so-called

scriptures and sacred traditions. There is a lot of theology in these

books, there is a lot of ideo¬logy. But there is no spirituality in

them. Can there be a reli¬gion without spirituality? Religion has

 110

something to do with man's spiritual quest, has something to do

with man's soul, with man's deeper drives, with man's larger and

loftier aspira¬tions. But we find nothing of this sort in the books of

Christi-anity and Islam. What we find there is political ideologies of

aggression, what we find there is imperialist ambitions of

conquering and converting other people by force.

The second implication of the 'Emerging National Vision is that

Muslims and Christians who have been forced into the fold of alien

ideologies, into the fold of imperialist ideologies masquerading as

religions, have to be brought back to their ancestral fold. These are

our own people. When we reject Islam, we do not reject Muslims.

When we reject Christianity, we do not reject Christians. They are

our own flesh and blood. They have to be rescued from the prison-

houses of Islam and Christianity, from the dark dungeons of

deadening fanaticism.

These are the implications which we should understand very

clearly. Hindu society has to be ideologically equipped. It has to

know its own history, its own scriptures, its own culture in depth

and width, its own identity as a nation. At the same

 111

time, it has to know from the horse's mouth, from the original

sources, the character of Islam and Christianity, the character of

Communism, and the character of modern materialism which is

now coming to us as American Consumerism. Unless we have this

knowledge, the battle will not be really joined.

The old enemies will use the old weapons over and over again so

long as Hindu society remains on the defensive. They will go on

calling us communalists, etc. Hindu society has been on the

defensive since 1920 when the Congress took up the cause of

Khilafat. Since then Islam and other alien forces have been on the

offensive. Islam has been saying that it stands for monotheism

while Hinduism stands for polytheism, that it stands for a casteless

society while Hinduism stands for caste hierarchy, and so on. Now

if we do not know the character of Hindu society, the character of

Varnashrama Dharma and how this social system has been our

great saviour throughout our history, we are taken in.

Very few people know that the Muslims in India have always

divided their own society into three separate sections, apart from

the fact that there are as many, if not more, castes among the
 112

Muslims as among the Hindus. The descendents of foreign invaders

like the Arabs, the Turks and the Persians are known among the

Muslims as ashriif which is the plural of sharif, which means the

noble ones, the exalted ones. The converts from the higher Hindu

castes like the Brahmins and Rajputs are known as ajliij And the

converts from the lower Hindu castes are known as arziil which is

the plural of razll, which means the ignoble, the mean. This

common language of casteism among the Muslims, we do not

know. Therefore, when they talk of Hindu society as caste-ridden

and their own society as casteless, we are taken in.

Again, take for instance this Islamic talk about monotheism.

This is a monstrous idea. It is not a spiritual idea at all. It puts God

above the cosmos and makes all manifestation bereft of divinity.

This is a theological idea. This is an intellectual concept. But we

have been trying to prove all these days that

we are also monotheists. We have to know the spirituality of

Sanatana Dharma as also the ideology of Islam in order to see

through monotheism and to reject it as an intellectual bluff.

An ideological battle has to be waged in order to avoid the other

battle, the physical battle. Societies which fail to fight an ideological

 113

battle, which refuse to repel ideological aggression, invite physical

aggression sooner or later. If ideological aggression is not stopped,

a society gets taken for granted and physical aggression follows.

This is the law of Nature. We did not fight against the ideological

aggression of the Muslim League which was later on joined by the

Commun¬ist Party of India (CFI). It was the CPI which collected

facts and figures and gave respectability to the ideological

aggres¬sion from Islam. I know it personally because I was myself a

Communist at that time. And we know what happened. Physical

aggression followed. The country was partitioned. Millions were

rendered homeless, millions were killed.

So, if we want to save our society from physical aggression, from

physical clashes, from street riots, from bloodshed, we should take

up this ideological battle immediately. But we have to be equipped

in order to fight this battle. We have to

. know our own Hindu society, our own Hindu culture, our own

Hindu history, our own Sanatana Dharma. We have also to know

Islam and Christianity and Communism from their own sources,

from the horse's mouth. We should not have any private versions of
 114

these alien ideologies. We should know them as they are in

themselves, as expounded by their own spokesmen.

We Hindus have a very bad habit, a suicidal habit, of find¬ing in

our own traditions, in our own scriptures, whatever the alien

ideologies claim for themselves. We try to find Christi¬anity in our

scriptures, we try to find Islam in our scriptures, we try to find

Communism in our scriptures. This is a very bad habit. We must

know the enemy as he is. Otherwise the ideo¬logical battle is not

really joined.

Today in India, Christianity is ideologically equipped. Over

that last so many years, Christian missionaries have been studying

Hindu religion, Hindu society and Hindu culture and tearing them

to bits. They know when and where to attack, when and where to

retreat. They know all the strategic points. They know all the

tactics. Islam has not been studying our religion or society or

culture. But it knows that when it says that it stands for

monotheism, that it stands for equality, that it stands for human

 115

brotherhood, the Hindu tends to run away. Whenever Islam calls

the Hindu a communalist, the Hindu runs away. So far as its own

ideology is concerned, Islam has a lot of centres where Islam is

taught in depth and detail. A lot of finance is also available for

these centres. New Islamic universities are coming up. You may

have read in the news¬papers that a 15 crare scheme has been

made for an Islamic Cultural Centre in New Delhi. Hidayatullah

has spoken about it. The money will come from the Islamic

Cooperative Bank floated by the Arabs. The Government of India

will also make a contribution.

But there is not a single Hindu centre worth the name in India. We

have lots of ashram as and mathas and some publish¬ing houses.

We have many swamis and lots of talk about Hindu religion and

Hindu culture. But there is no Hindu centre which develops Hindu

scholarship , which studies the whole range of Hindu heritage,

which tries to know and to make known Islam and Christianity and

Communism inside out. There is no Hindu centre which can

provide comparative studies and a clarity of vision and which can

equip us for an ideological battle. The National Vision which is

emerging has not only to be reaffirmed, it has also to be

ideologically equipped.
 116

As I come to the end of my talk today, I should like to add one more

point. We should not see this ideological battle as taking place in

India alone. That will narrow down our perspective. The ideological

battle which is taking place in India is part of a worldwide battle.

We are not alone. We also have our allies abroad. Our allies are not

foreign governments

and foreign financial institutions. Our greatest ally is the

indomitable and immortal human spirit, the deeper culture of the

human soul. The wave of humanism, rationalism and universalism

which has been sweeping over the Western world is our strongest

ally. Christianity, for instance, is almost dead in the West today.

They give money to the Christian missions under the mistaken

impression that the missionaries are doing social service in India.

But if we make it known to the West, to the people over there, that

the Christian mission¬aries are using this money for subverting

Hindu society and Hindu culture, we shall find many allies.

Islam is a hard nut to crack because Islam is still living in a world

of die-hard dogmatism. Islamic lands are under a deep spell of

darkness. It is very difficult to penetrate these lands physically. We

can go into the homelands of Christianity. We can speak to them,

 117

we -can appeal to them, we can discuss with them. Their minds

have opened up. But the mind of Islam is a closed mind. It is not

easy to open it up.

I have discussed this problem of Islam with Sri Ram Swarup. He

says that ideas can penetrate every wall, travel everywhere. Maybe

we are unable to go physically into Islamic lands with our message

of humanism, rationalism and universalism. But we can give a call

to them to throwaway their closed creed and feel free. We can invite

them into the open sunshine of natural spirituality which is

Sanatana Dharma. The Islamic lands are in the throes of a deep

crisis. Most of their students who go to Western universities, who

come to Indian universities, do not want to go back to their Islamic

countries, Iran and Iraq and so on. They find the atmosphere at

home suffocating. They are our allies.

So we should not see this ideological battle which is raging in India

today in isolation. It is a worldwide battle. Christianity has its allies

abroad. Islam has its allies abroad. So has Communism. But we

also have our allies abroad. Our allies may not have money as their

allies have. Our allies may not have physical power, military power,

as their allies have. But

 118

we must remember that our ally is the human spirit ~very¬where.

We must appeal to this human spirit, seek succour from this

human spirit, as we go into an ideological battle. We are bound to

win.

I thank you all for giving me a patient hearing, for sparing so much

of your time.
 119

Appendix - 2

Plea for Study of Islamic . Polity in India's Universities

To

The Chairman

University Grants Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New

Delhi-ll0002

Sub: Inclusion of the study of Islamic Concept

of State in the syllabus of Political Science prescribed for the

students of B.A. and M.A. classes.

Sir,

I am writing this letter for your consideration after care¬fully

studying the contents of the subject of Political Science which is

being taught to our students in various universities in the country.

I. You must be aware, as many others are, that the most

truculent problem that our country has been facing for more than a

hundred years is the problem of Muslims, their aspirations, their

proneness to violence, their dis¬like of dissent and debate, and

 120

their undying belief that gun and sword is the ultimate arbiter. No

sooner, one demand of the Muslims in India is conceded that

another is raised. This situation cannot be better illustrated than

by the classic observation of Mr. H.S. Suhrawardy, one

time Prime Minister of United Bengal just before the notorious

Direct Action of August 16, 1946 in Calcutta, that "Pakistan is not

our last demand but our latest demand". More than 5000 Hindus

and Muslims were killed as a result of this Direct Action launched

by the Muslim League. Has the creation of Pakistan solved the

Muslim/communal problem? The answer is an emphatic No. But

why? The one and only reason is that our academia, for unknown

reasons, has over the years, totally neglected the study of the

Islamic Concept of State or Khilafat as if such a concept does not

exist either in the world of political thought or Islamic theo¬logy.

Nations which have a proper understanding of this concept have

dealt with Muslim problems much more effectively and much better

than us.

This deficiency in the teaching of Political Science in our

universities has been of monumental proportions. 111 fact, while

 121

no attention has been paid to this aspect, a certain class of

intellectuals react to any such suggestion with utmost disdain and

contempt. No wonder, that several generations of all communities

and Hindus in particular, have paid a terribly heavy price in terms

of unmitigated violence, bloodshed and "ethnic cleansing" of

Himalayan dimensions. If the future generations have to be

protected against such violence then the study of Islamic Theory of

State or Khilafat must be included in the relevant syllabi. Future

generations will be en-lightened about the source and wellsprings

of violence and why the Muslim problem has remained so vicious in

spite of herculean efforts made by Mahatma Gandhi who failed to

win over the Muslims resulting in dis¬astrous consequences for the

Indian nation including his dastardly assassination.

The proposed subjects of study would include the following:

i. Islamic Concept 'of State/Khilafat and its history.

PLEA FOR STUDY OF ISLAMIC POLITY IN INDIA'S

UNIVERSITIES / 75

ii. The role of violence in an Islamic state.

lll. The duties of a ruler in an Islamic state.

 122

iv. Human Rights in an Islamic state.

v. Position of minorities in an Islamic state. vi. Dissidence and

debate in an Isla,mic state. VII. The role of Fatwas in an Islamic

state.

viii. The concepts of Jihad, Jiziyah, Ghanimah (Plunder), Dar-ul-

Harb and Dar-ul-Islam.

IX. The Quranic concept of war. x. Banking and Usury.

xi. Plurality vs Hijrat.

4. All this and more is an integral part of the overarching Islamic

political thought. Its study has now become imperative in national

interest and should no more be neglected. Such calamities as

partition of India and the Kashmir problem (which is now 50 years

old) could have been avoided by proper study and evaluation of

Islamic political thought.

5. The Islamic State/Khilafat has four clear cut periods

which are as follows:

1. First Khilafat - Period of pure theocracy 632 to

661 A.D.
 123

II. Second Khilafat - 661 to 1258 A.D. The Khilafat

took the shape of hereditary temporal dominion.

Ill. Third Khilafat - 1258 to 1517 A.D. The Khilafat had no

sovereign rights, and temporal authority was wielded by Mamluk

Sultans of Egypt and Muslim Princes.

IV. Fourth and last Khilafat (Ottomon) 1517 to 1921

A.D. Abolished by Mustafa Kamal.

There is no reason why the study of Khilafat alongwith Platonic,

Christian and Marxist concepts of state must not be made

compulsory.

Thus, in view of the foregoing, you are requested to

kindly advise or direct the universities all over the country to take

immediate steps in this regard. Those willing to do so

will soon realise how grossly deficient their knowledge of the

subject had been.

 124

In the end, it may also be mentioned that there is no dearth of

excellent books on the subject by both Muslim and non¬Muslim

authors. •

Kindly acknowledge receipt.

Copy to:-

1. Vice-Chancellors of all universities in India.

2. Heads of Departments of Political Science III all Universities

in India

Appendix - 3

Scriptural Sanctions for the Behaviour Pattern of the Followers of

Biblical or Prophetic Monotheism

Chandigarh

5 September 1998
 125

Yours truly, Baljit Rai IPS (Retd.)

1. Good News Bible: Today' s English Version, Bible Society of

India, Bangalore, n.d.

2. The meaning of the Glorious Quran, Text, Translation and

Commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Dar al-Kitab al-Misri, Cairo,

Third Edition, 2 volumes, 1938.

3. Sirat Rasul Allah of Ibn Ishaq, translated into English as The

Life of Muhammad by A. Gillaume (1955), aup, Karachi, Eighth

Impression, 1987.

4. The Rauzat-us-Safa or, Garden of Purity of Muhammad

Khavendshah bin Mahmiid, translated into English by E. Rehatsek

(1893), Delhi reprint, Part II, Volume Second, 1982.

5. The Hedaya, Commentary on Islamic Law, translated by

Charles Hamilton (London, 1791), New Delhi reprint, Volume II,

1985.

6. Hughes, Thomas Patrick, Dictionary of Islam (1885), New

Delhi reprint, 1976.

7. Sahih Muslim of Imam Muslim, cited in Dictionary of Islam.

 126

8. Miskat of Imam al-Umri, cited in Dictionary of Islam.

9. Zhakhiratu'l-Muluk of Saiyid 'Ali Hamadani, cited in A

History of Sufism in India by Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, Volume I,

New Delhi, 1978.

10. Tabqiit-i-Ibn Sa'd, translated into Urdu by AWima 'Abdullah

aI-AhmadI, 2 Parts, Karachi, 1982

Misleading (Mischievous?) Translations

The Being who communicates with Moses in the Bible identifies

himself as YHWH. Exodus 3.13-15 reads: "But Moses replied,

'When I go to the Israelites and say to them, the God of your

ancestors sent ,me to you, they will ask me, What is his name? So

what can I tell them?' God said, 'I am who I am. This is what you

must say to them: The one who is called I AM has sent me to you.'

Tell the Israelites that I, the LORD, the God of their ancestors, the

God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, have sent you to them. This is

my name for ever; this is what all future generations are to call me"

(Good News Bible, The old Testament p. 61). The translators

 127

explain in a footnote: "'I am' sounds like the Hebrew name Yahweh

traditionally transliterated as Jehovah. This name is represented in

this translation by 'the LORD' in capital letters, following a usage

which is widespread in English versions" (Ibid., n.e. Emphasis in

original). But as they themselves point out in the Preface, the

Hebrew language has a distinct word meaning 'Lord' -idonai (Ibid.,

p. viii). Another modern translation says the same thing: "The word

LORD when spelled with capital letters, stands for the divine name

YHWH, which is here connected with the verb hayah, to be" (The

Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version, New York, n.d., p. 58). The

translators of this version, however, admit quite frankly: "The use

of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were

other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, was

discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely

inappropriate for the univer¬sal faith of the Christian Ghurch"

(Ibid., p. vii. Emphasis added). The Revised Standard Version also

points out that

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PATTERN

/ 79
 128

the Hebrew word "Elohim" has been rendered as "God" in all

English translations (Ibid., p.vi).

We wonder, in the absence of an explilllation in the foregoing

apology, as to why the use of the proper name, YHWH, was

"discontinued in Judaism". But whatever may be the explanation,

the fact remains that YHWH of the Bible is a Being who has his

Chosen People as well as a hit list of his enemies. To pass off such

a questionable character as LORD is absolutely dishonest. So also

the attempt to pass off "Elohim" as "God". The words "Lord" as well

as "God" are Germanic in origin and were used, as we shall explain,

in a polytheistic and pantheistic context by the Pagan Germans

before they were forced into the fold of Christianity. In fact, the

word "God" is from Indo-European, and is cognate with the

Sanskrit word "Huta", meaning "he to whom oblations are offered".

Similar is the case with the word "Allah" which has been uniformly

translated as "God" in the English version of the Quran we have

used. Most English translations of the Quran have been doing the

same for years on end. The first half of the Kalimah itself has been

translated into English to read "There is no god but God", which is

mischievous to say the least. The correct translation should be

 129

"There is no god but Allah". It is true that Allah is a composite

Arabic word which means The (Al) God (Liih). In the pre-Islamic

Arabic language, Allah was the Supreme God of the Pagan Arab

pantheon which had many other Gods and Goddesses. But the

word "Allah" started having an altogether different meaning when

Muhammad, the Last Prophet according to the Quran, hijacked it

from the ancient Arab language and used it as a synonym for

YHWH of the Bible. Allah of the Quran claims again and again that

he is the same Being who had made revelations to the Jewish

prophets, who had spoken at length to Moses when he led the Jews

out of Egypt and towards "the Promised Land" in Palestine, and

who had sent Jesus as the prophet of the Christians. We agree with

the

Government of Malaysia which has enacted a law that the word

"Allah" should not be translated into any other word, - and should

remain as such in all translations of Islamic scriptures.

What is more important, the conceptual context in which the words

"Lord" and "God" and "Allah" were used by the pre-Christian

 130

German Pagans and the pre-Islamic Arab Pagans, was radically

different from that imposed on these words by the Bible and the

Quran. We have to make the following observations on the

conceptional context:

1. In the Pagan context, these words stood for a Supreme God

who transcended the Cosmos at the same time that he was

immanent in it. In the Biblical and the Quranic context, on the

other hand, these words have been used for a Being who is extra-

Cosmic and for whom both transcendence as well as immanence

are blasphemous notions.

2. In the Pagan context, these words signified the Great God

who presided over a pantheon of numerous Gods and Goddesses,

who shared his divinity with members of his pantheon, and who

could be wor-shipped through any God or Goddess. Moreover, he

as well as members of his pantheon, could be wor-shipped in many

forms including those of birds, animals, trees, plants, rocks - male

or female, anim-ate or inanimate, carved or uncarved. In the

Biblical and Quranic context, on the other hand, these words

denote a Being who stands alone without any pan-theon, who

shares his attributes only with himself, and who cannot be

 131

worshipped in any form what-soever. Moreover, the Being of the

Bible and the Quran is a male chauvinist, particularly hostile to

female deities who were worshipped widely in areas where these

two scriptures took shape and worked havoc.

3. In the Pagan context, these words denoted a Gra-

cious God who was directly accessible to whosoever sought for him

sincerely through any spiritual discipline suited to the seeker's

stage of moral and spiritual development. In the Biblical and the

Quranic context, on the other hand, these words stand for a Being

who is accessible only to some privileged persons, known as

prophets and chosen by him arbitrarily without any reference to

the moral and spiritual qualifications of the persons thus

honoured. All other human beings have to learn about him and his

commandments through the mouth of the prophets.

IV. In the Pagan context, these words stood for a Universal God

who was equally benevolent to all creation, human as well as non-

human, who shower¬ed his favours on whosoever sought his help

with love, devotion and good works, and who did not call for faith in

any intermediary. In the Biblical and the Quranic context, on the

other hand, the words mean a partisan Being who has his Chosen
 132

People as well as his Chosen Enemies, and who commands the

former to wage a permanent war for destroying the latter root and

branch. He does not care for the moral and spiritual merits of the

people in the two camps; his choice depends only on one criterion

-acceptance or repudiation of his latest prophet.

We have, therefore, replaced the words "Lord" and "God" with the

words "Jehovah" and "Elohlm" in our citations from the English

translation of the Bible, and with the words "Rabb" and "Allah" in

our citations from the English trans¬lation of the Quran.

Next, there are Arabic words in the verses we have cited from the

Quran, which have been mistranslated to suit the convenience of

modern Islamic Apologetics. The following may be noted as

examples:

i. Qatl: The Arabic word "qatl" means "murder"

(Dictionary, pp. 420-21, 479). Even in the Urdu language which

has borrowed the word from Arabic, the word stands simply for

killing, slaying murder, etc. But in the verses we have cited from
 133

the English translation, it has been rendered as "fight" in 2.190,

193,216,244; 3.146; 4.74, 76, 84; 8.39, 65; 9.12, 29, 36, 123. In

2.191, on the other hand, it has been rendered as "slay". The cat

comes out of the bag in 9.111 where at one point the word has

been rendered as "fight" but at another point as "slay". Also in

3.169 and 47.4.

11. Kafir: The Arabic word "kafir" literally means "the coverer".

"The word is generally used by Muhammadans to define one who is

an unbeliever in the ministry of Muhammad and his Qur' an, and

in this sense it has been used by Muhammad himself" (Dictionary,

p. 259). In the verses we have cited from the English translation,

however, this word has been rendered variously as "those who

reject faith" (2.257, 9.3, 47.8), "t~ose who suppress faith" (2.191),

"those who resist faith" (3.147, 5.39), "those who reject our Signs"

(4.56), "those who blaspheme" (5.75), "those who resist God" (8.14),

"unfaith" (9.12), and "those who reject God" (4.78, 9.2, 47.34). The

translator has thus been arbitrary as well as inconsistent. The

word "faith" in the translation serves for the Arabic word "lman",

which means "confession of the lips to the truth of the Muslim

religion" (Ibid., p. 204). The word "God" used by the translator is a

mistrans¬lation of the word "Allah", as we have already pointed out.

 134

iii. Taghut: The Dictionary of Islam (p. 625) defines Taghiit as "An

idol mentioned in the Qur'an (2.257, 2.59, 4.54)" anp says further

that according to Jalaluddin "Taghut was an idol of the Quraish".

But

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PAITERN / 83 in

the translation cited by us it has been rendered as "E:il." w~th

~apital E (2.257, 4.76, 16.36, 39.17). ThIS IS mIschIevous. The idol

under reference might have been denounced by Muhammad, but

for the Arab Pagans it represented a divinity. The translator should

have retained the proper name and not forced it to mean the

opposite of what it meant to those who had installed it.

There are many other tricks played by this translator in his

translation as a whole; particularly when he uses brackets for

interpolating words which are not there in the Arabic text. In sh~rt,

the .who~e of this translation is an exercise in Apolo¬getics, as IS

qUIte clear if one refers to the copious footnotes on every page.

The Bible

1. Then Moses said to Jehovah," The People cannot come up,

because you commanded us to consider the mountain sacred and

to ~ark a boundary round it" ... Jehovah spoke and . these were
 135

hIS words: "I am Jehovah your Elohim who brought you out of

Egypt, where you were slaves. Worship no god but me. Do not

make for yourselves images of anything in heaven or on earth or in

the water under the earth. Do not bow dow~ to any idol or worship

it, because I am Jehovah your ElohIm and I tolerate no rivals. I

bring punishment on those who hate me and on their descendants

down to the third and f?urth generation. But I show my love to

thousands of genera¬tIons of those who love me and obey my

laws." (Exodus 19:23; 20.1-6) ,

" 2. Jehovah commanded Moses to say to the Israelites:

... You have seen how I, Jehovah, have spoken to you from heaven.

I?o not make for yourselves gods of silver or gold to be worshIpped

in addition to me ... My angel will go ahead of you and take you

into the land of the Amorites, the Hittites, the

Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites, the Jebusites, and I will

destroy them. Do not bow down to their gods or worship them and
 136

do not adopt their religious practices. Destroy their gods and break

down their sacred stone pillars." (Exodus, 20:22-23; 23:23-24)

3. When Moses came close enough to the camp to see the bull-calf

and to see the people dancing, he was furious ... He took the bull-

calf which they had made, melted it, ground it into fine powder,

and mixed it with water. Then he made the people of Israel drink it.

(Exodus, 32:19, 20)

4. Then Moses said to the people ... "When Jehovah spoke to you

from the fire on Mount Sinai, you did not see any form. For your

own good, then make certain that you do not sin by making for

yourselves an idol in any form at all - whether man or woman,

animal or bird, reptile or fish. Do not be tempt¬ed to worship and

serve what you see in the sky - the sun, the moon and the stars.

Jehovah your Elohim has given these to all other peoples for them

to worship. But you are the people he rescued from Egypt, that

blazing furnace ... Be certain that you do not forget the covenant

that Jehovah your Elohim made with you .... Be certain that you

do. Obey his command not to make yourselves any kind of idol

because Jehovah your Elo¬him is like a flaming fire; he tolerates no

rivals. (Deuteronomy, 4:1, 15-20,23,24)

 137

5. "Honour Jehovah your Elohim, worship only him and make your

promises in his name alone. Do not worship other gods, any of the

gods of the peoples around you. If you do worship other gods,

Jehovah's anger will come against you like fire and will destroy you

completely, because Jehovah your Elohim, who is present with you,

tolerates no rivals. (Deuteronomy, 6: 13-15)

6. "Jehovah your Elohim will bring you into the land which you are

going to occupy, and he will drive many nations out of it. As you

advance, he will drive out seven nations larger and more powerful

than you ... When Jehovah your Elohim places these people in your

power and you defeat them, you must put

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PATIERN

/ 85

them all to death. Do not make any alliance with them or show

them any mercy. Do not marry any of them, and do not let your

children marry any of them, because then they would lead your

children away from Jehovah to worship other gods. If that happens,

Jehovah will be angry with you and destroy you at once. So then,

tear down their altars, break their sacred stone pillars in pieces,

cut down the symbols of their goddess Asherah, and burn their
 138

idols. Do this because you belong to Jehovah your Elohim. From all

the peoples on earth he chose you to be his own special people ...

He will put their kings in your power. You will kill them, and they

will be forgotten. No one will be able to stop you; you will destroy

everyone. Burn their idols. Do not desire the silver or gold that is

on them, and do not take it for yourselves. If you do, that will he be

fatal, because Jehovah hates idolatry. Do not bring any of these

idols into your homes, or the same curse will be on you that is on

them. You must hate and despise those idols, because they are

under Jehovah's curse. (Deuteronomy, 7: 1-6, 24-26)

7. Moses called together all the people of Israel and said to them,

"People of Israel, listen to all the laws that I am giving you today ...

Here are the laws that you are to obey as long as you live in the

land that Jehovah, the Elohim of your ancestors, is giving you.

Listen to them! In the land that you are taking, destroy all the

places where the people worship their gods on high mountains, on

hills and under green trees. Tear down their altars and smash their

sacred stone pillars to pieces. Burn their symbols of the goddess

Asherah and chop down their idols, so that they will never again be

worshipped at those places .,. Even your brother or your son or

your daughter or the wife you love or your closest friend may
 139

secretly encourage you to worship other gods, gods that you and

your ancestors have never worshipped. One of them may .

encourage you to worship the gods of those who live near you or

the gods of those who live far away. But do not let him persuade

you; do not even listen to him. Show him no mercy or pity, and do

not protect him. Kill him! Be the first to stone

86 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION him, and then let everyone else stone him too. Stone

him to death! He tried to lead you away from Jehovah your Elohim,

who rescued you from Egypt, where you were slaves. Then all the

people of Israel will hear what happened; they will be afraid, and no

one will ever again do such an evil thing. (Deuteronomy, 5:1; 12:1-

3; 13:6-11)

8. "When you are living in the towns that Jehovah your Elohim

gives you, you may hear that some worthless men of your nation

have misled the people of their town to worship gods that you have

never worshipped before. If you hear such a rumour, investigate it

thoroughly; and if it is true that this evil thing did happen, then kill
 140

all the people in that town completely. Bring together all the

possessions of the people who live there and pile them up in the

town square. Then burn the town and everything in it as an

offering to Jehovah your Elohim. It must be left in ruins for ever

and never again rebuilt. (Deuteronomy, 13:12-16)

9. "But when you capture cities in the land that Jehovah your

Elohim is giving you, kill everyone. Completely destroy all the

people: the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites,

the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as Jehovah ordered you to do. Kill

them, so that they will not make you sin against Jehovah by

teaching you to do all the disgusting things that they do in the

worship of their gods." (Deutero¬nomy, 20:16-18)

10. Then Moses said to the people of Israel, " ... The Levites will

speak these words in a loud voice: Elohim's curse on anyone who

makes an idol of stone, wood, or metal and secretly worships it.

Jehovah hates idolatry." (Deuteronomy, 27: 11, 15)

11. Stephen answered " ... It was then that they made an idol in the

shape of a bull, offered sacrifice to it, and had a feast in honour of

what they themselves had made. So Elohim turned away from

them." (Acts, 7:41-42)

 141

12. My children, keep yourselves safe from false gods!

(l John, 5:21) .

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PAITERN / 87

13. Do not try to work together as equals with the un¬believers, for

it cannot be done. How can right and wrong be partners? How can

light and darkness live together? How can Christ and Devil agree?

What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? How can

Elohim's temple come to terms with pagan idols? For we are the

temple of the living Elohim! (2 Corinthians, 6:16)

14. All those people speak about... how you [Thessalonians] turned

away from. idols to Elohim, to serve the true and living Elohim ... (1

Thessalonians, 1 :9)

The Quran

15. No partner has He [Allah]: This am I commanded, and I am the

first of those who bow to His will. (Quran, 6:163)

16. And remember We took a covenant from the children of Israel

(to this effect): worship none [no other god] but Allah. (Quran, 2:83)
 142

17. For we assuredly sent amongst every people an apostle (with

the commandment), "Serve Allah, and eschew Taghiit..." So travel

through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied

the Truth. Shun the abomination of idols. (Quran, 16:36; 22:30)

18. Say: "We [Muslims] worship none but Allah; we associate no

partners with Him. Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the

Unbelievers for that they joined companions with Allah ... Their

abode will be the Fire." (Quran, 3:64, 151)

19. We took the Children of Israel (with safety) across the sea. They

came upon a people devoted entirely to some idols they had. They

said: "0 Moses ! fashion for us a god like unto the gods they have."

He said: "Surely you are a people without knowledge. As to these

folk, - the cult they are in is (but) a fragment of a ruin, and vain is

the (worship) which they practise." He said: "Shall I seek for you a

god other than Allah, when it is Allah who has endowed you with

gifts above the nations ?" ... The people of Moses made in his

absence, out of their ornaments, the image of a calf (for worship) ...

They took
 143

88 / INOlA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERS'ON

it for worship and they did wrong ... When Moses came back to his

people, angry and grieved, he said: "Evil it is that you have done in

my place in my absence ... Those who took the calf (for worship)

will indeed be overwhelmed with wrath from their Rabb and with

shame in this life. Thus we do recompense those who invent

(falsehoods) ... He prayed: "0 my Rabb!. .. Would you destroy us for

the deeds of the foolish ones among us ... So forgive us and give us

your mercy; for you are the best of those who forgive ... He said:

"With My Punishment I visit whom I will." (Quran, 7:138-140, 148,

150, 152, 155, 156)*

20. Lo! Abraham said to his father Azar: "Take you idols for gods?

For I see you and your people in manifest error." (Quran, 6:74)

21. And rehearse to them (something of) Abraham's story.

Behold! he said to his father and his people: " What worship ~ou?"

They said: "We worship idols, and we remain constantly III

attendance on them." He said: "Do they listen to you when you call

or do you good or harm?" They said: "Nay, but we found our fathers

doing thus." He said: "Do you then see whom you have been
 144

worshipping, you and your fathers before you? For they are

enemies to me." (Quran, 26:70-77)

22. And he (Abraham) said: "For you, you have taken (for worship)

idols besides Allah out of mutual love and regard between

yourselves in this life; but on the Day of Judgement you shall

disown each other and curse each other: and your abode will be the

Fire, and you shall have none to help." (Quran, 29:25)

23. We bestowed aforetime on Abraham his rectitude of conduct.

Behold! he said to his father and his people, "What are these

images, to which you are devoted ?" They said, "We found our

fathers worshipping them." He said, "Indeed you have been in

manifest Error - you and your fathers .... And by Allah, I have a

plan for your idols, after you go away and turn your backs." So he

broke them to pieces, (all) but the

*This story of the Golden Calfis repeated in 20:82-99.

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PATTERN / 89

biggest of them ... (Abraham) said, "Do you then worship, besides

Allah, things that can neither be of any good to you nor do you
 145

harm? Fie upon you, and upon the things that you worship besides

Allah! Have you no sense?" They said, "Burn him and protect your

gods." ... We said, "0 Fire! Be you cool, and (a means of) safety for

Abraham!" Then they sought a stratagem against him: but We

made them the ones that lost most. But we delivered him ...

(Quran, 21:51-54, 57-58, 66-71)

24. Noah said: "0 my Rabb! They have disobeyed me ...

And they have said (to each other), 'abandon not your gods.' ...

They have already misled many; and grant you no increase to the

wrong-doers but in straying (from their mark)." Because of their

sins they were drowned (in the flood), and were made to enter the

Fire (of Punishment): and they found - in lieu of Allah - none to

help them. And Noah said: "0 my Rabb! Leave not of the

Unbelievers a single one on earth! For if You do leave (any of) them,

they will but mislead Your devotees, and they will breed none but

wicked ungrate-ful ones." (Quran, 71:21, 23-27)

25. Behold, Luqman said to his son by way of instruction: "0 my

son! join not in worship (others) with Allah: for false worship is

indeed the highest wrong-doing." (Quran, 31: 13)

26. He is the Living (One): there is no god but He ... Say:

 146

"I have been forbidden to invoke those whom you invoke besides

Allah ... " Those who reject the Book and the (revel¬ations) with

which We sent Our apostles: but soon shall they know, when the

yokes (shall be) round their necks, and the chains, they shall be

dragged along in the boiling fetid fluid; then in the Fire shall they

be burned; then shall it be said to them: "Where are the (deities) to

which you gave part worship - in derogation of Allah ... Enter you

the gates of Hell, to dwell therein: and evil is (this) abode of the

arrogant". (Quran, 40:65, 66, 70-74, 76)

27. Allah has said: "Take not (for worship) two gods: for He is just

One Allah: then fear Me (and Me alone)." (Quran, 16:51)

28. Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him ... To set up

partners with Allah is to devise a sin most heinous indeed. Allah

forgives not (the sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He

forgives, to whom He pleases other sins than this: one who joins

other gods with Allah, has strayed far, far away (from the

Right) (Quran, 4:36, 48, 116)

 147

29 Of those who reject faith the patrons are the Taghut:

from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness.

They will be the companions of the Fire, to dwell therein (for ever).

(Quran, 2:257)

30 ... .invoke not, with Allah, any other god ... and any that does

this (not only) meets punishment (but) the penalty on the Day of

Judgement will be doubled to him, and he will dwell therein in

ignominy. (Quran, 25:68-69)

3]. These are among the (precepts of) wisdom, which your Rabb has

revealed to you. Take not, with Allah, another object . of worship,

lest you should be thrown into Hell, blameworthy and rejected.

(Quran, 17:39)

32. Those who eschew Taghut and fall not into its worship, and

turn to Allah (in repentance), for them is Good News: So announce

the Good News to My servants ... The Unbelievers will be led to Hell

in crowd ... (To them) will be said: "Enter you the gates of Hell, to

dwell therein: and evil is (this) abode of the arrogant!" (Quran,

39:17, 7]-72)
 148

33. And the places of worship are for Allah alone. So invoke not

anyone along with Allah ... Say: "I do no more than invoke my

Rabb, and I join not with Him any (false god) ... For any that

disobey Allah and His Apostle, - for them is Hell: they shall dwell

therein for ever." (Quran, 72: 18, 20, 23)

Sunnah of the Prophet of Islam:

34. The apostle entered Mecca on the day of the conquest and it

contained 360 idols which IbUs had strengthened with lead. The

apostle was standing by them with a stick in his hand, saying, 'The

truth has come and falsehood has passed

away; verily falsehood is sure to pass away' (Sura 17.82). Then he

pointed at them with his stick and they collapsed on their backs

one after the other.

When the apostle prayed the noon prayer on the day of the

conquest he ordered that all the idols which were round the Ka'ba

should be collected and burned with fire and broken up. Faqala b.

al-Mulawwilf al-Layathi said commemorating the

. day of the conquest:

Had you seen Muhammad and his troops

 149

The day the idols were smashed when he entered,

You would have seen Allah's light become manifest And darkness

covering the face of idolatry. (Ibn Ishaq,

p.552)

35. Then the apostle sent Khalid to al-'Uzza which was in Nakhla.

"It was a temple which this tribe of Quraysh and Kinana and al-

Muqar used to venerate. Its guardians and warders were B.

Shayban of B. Sulaym, allies of B. Hashim ... When Khalid arrived

he destroyed her and returned to the apostle. (Ibid., p. 565)

36. The proclaimer authorised by the Prophet of Allah went

throughout calling upon all those who believe in Allah and the Last

Day to leave no idol unbroken in their homes. (Tabqiit-i¬Ibn Sa'd,

Volume I, p. 478)

37. The Prophet sent expeditions to those idols which were in the

neighbourhood and had them destroyed; these included al-'Uzza,

Manat, Suwa, Buana and Dhu'l-Kaffayn (Ibid.)

38. It is related in some biographies that while the siege of Tayf was

being carried on, his holy and prophetic lordship appointed A'li

Murtadza with a number of glorious com¬panions to make

 150

excursions into the country, and to destroy every idol they could

find ... Thereon A'Ii, the Commander of the Faithful... destroyed all

the idols of the Bani Hoazan and Bani Thaqyf which were in that

region. The apostle was waiting for his return near the gate of the

fort of Tayf, and as soon as the prince of saints had terminated his

business, he joined the august camp, was received by the seal of

prophets

92 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION with the exclamation of the Takbyr ... (The Rauzat-

us-Safa, pp. 630-631).

39. Among the things they [the envoys of the Arab tribe of Thaq1f]

asked the apostle was that they should be allowed to retain their

idol AI-Lat undestroyed for three years. The apostle refused, and

they continued to ask him for a year or two, and he refused; finally

they asked for a month after their return home; but he refused to

agree to any set time. All that they wanted as they were trying to

show was to be safe from their fanatics and women and children by

leaving her, and they did not want to frighten their people by
 151

destroying her [the idol of the goddess AI-Lat] until they had

accepted Islam. The apostle refused this ... When they had

accomplished their task [of embracing Islam] and had set out to

return to their country the apostle sent with them Abu Sufyan and

al-Mughlra to destroy the idol... When al-Mughlra entered he went

up to the idol and struck it with a pick-axe ... When al-Mughlra

had destroyed her [the idol] and taken what was on her and her

jewels he sent for Abu Sufyan when her jewellery and gold and

beads had been collected. (Ibn Ishiiq, pp. 615-617)

40. A deputation of nineteen men from Banu Hanlfa came to the

Prophet of Allah ... They were treated well... These people presented

themselves to the Prophet in the mosque ... and received

instruction in the Quran ... When they intended to return, the

Prophet ordered that each one of them be given five ounces of silver

as a gift... When they got ready to return the Prophet gave them a

vessel which contained water left over from his ablutions, and he

said, "When you return to your country, destroy the church, wash

the site with this water, and build a mosque on it." These people

did accordingly. Talq bin 'Ali became the muazzin. He gave the

azan. The priest incharge heard it, and said that it was an
 152

invitation to truth, and ran away. His days were over. (Tabqat-i-Ibn

Sa'd, Volume II, pp. 91-92).

41. A deputation consi.sting of ten men came to Medina from

Khaulan in the year AH 10. They informed the Prophet

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PATTERN

/ 93

that they were Muslims. The Prophet asked, "What about your idol

of 'Amm Anas?" They replied, "That is in a bad shape. We have

exchanged him for Allah whom you have brought. When we go

back, we shall destroy him." The Prophet ordered some one to

instruct them in the Quran and the Traditions. After some days, at

the time of their departure, the Prophet ordered that each one of

them be given twelve and a half

. ounces of silver as reward. They went back and destroyed the idol

of 'Amm Anas even before they untied their baggage. (Ibid., p. 100).

1. Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you ... and slay them

wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have

turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than

slaughter ... such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if
 153

they cease, Allah is oft-forgiving, most merciful. And fight them on

until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevails

justice and faith in Allah. But if they cease, let there be no hostility

except to those who practise oppression. (Quran, 2: 190-193).

2. Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is

possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that

you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows and you

know noL .. Those who believed and those who suffered exile and

fought (and strove and struggled) in the path of Allah - they have

the hope of the mercy of Allah. (Quran, 2:216, 218)

3. How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah's way), and with them

(fought) large bands of godly men? But they never lost-heart if they

met with disaster in Allah's way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor

give in. And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast. All that

they said was: "Our Rabb!. .. establish our feet firmly and help us

against those that resist Faith." ... Soon shall we cast terror into

the hearts of the

 154

Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which

He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: and evil is

the home of the wrong-doers! ... And if you are slain, or die, in the

way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than

all they could amass. And if you die, or are slain, Lo! it is unto

Allah that you are brought together. .. Think not of those who are

slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they live, finding their

sustenance in the Presence of their Rabb. (Quran, 3:146-

147,151,157-158,169)

4. Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world

for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of Allah, - whether

he is slain or gets victory - soon shall we give him a reward of great

(value) ... Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those

who reject Faith fight in the cause of Taghiit. So fight you against

the Friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan ... Say:

"Short is the enjoyment of this world: the Hereafter is the best...!

Wherever you are, death will find you out, even if you are in towers

built up strong and high!" ... He who obeys the Apostle, obeys Allah

... Then fight in Allah's cause. You are held responsible only for

yourself - and rouse the Believers. It may be that Allah will restrain

the fury of the Unbelievers; for Allah is the strongest in might and
 155

punishment... They but wish that you should reject Faith, as they

do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): but take not friends

from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (from what is

forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them

wherever you find them ... Never should a Believer kill a Believer...

0 you who believe! when you go abroad in the cause of Allah ...

With Allah are profits and spoils abundant. (Quran, 4:74, 76-78,

80, 84, 89, 92-94)

5.0 you who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of

approach unto Him, and strive with might and main in His cause

that you may prosper ... 0 you who believe! If any from among you

turn back from his Faith, soon will Allah produce a people whom

He will love as they will love Him, -

lowly with the Believers, mighty against the Rejecters, fighting in

the way of Allah, and never afraid of the reproaches. (Quran, 5:38,

57)

6. Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the

cause of Allah ... for them is the forgiveness of sins and a provision

most generous. (Quran, 8:74)

 156

7. Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might and

main in Allah's cause, with their goods and persons, have the

highest rank in the sight of Allah. They are the people who will

achieve (salvation). Their Allah does give them glad tidings of a

mercy from Himself, of His good pleasure, and of Gardens for them

wherein are delights that endure. They will dwell therein for ever.

Verily in Allah's presence is a reward, greatest (of all). (Quran, 9:20-

22)

8. Go you forth (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and

struggle, with your goods and your persons, in the cause of Allah.

That is best for you, if you (but) knew ... Those who were left

behind (in the Tabuk expedition) rejoiced in their inaction behind

the back of the Apostle of Allah: they hated to strive and fight, with

their goods and their persons, in the cause of Allah: they said, "Go

not forth in the heat." Say, "The fire of Hell is fiercer in heat." If only

they could under¬stand! Let them laugh a little: much will they

weep: a recom¬pense for the (evil) that they do. (Quran, 9:41, 81-

82)

9. Allah has purchased of the Believers their persons and their

goods; for theirs (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise):

 157

They fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding

on Him in Truth, through the Taurah, the Injil, and the Quran: And

who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Then rejoice in the

bargain which you have concluded: that is the achievement

supreme. (Quran, 9: 111)

10. Therefore when you meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at

their necks; at length, when you have thoroughly subdued them,

bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either

generosity or ransom: until the war lays down its burdens. Thus

(are you commanded) ... But those who are

6.

96 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION slain in the way of Allah - He will never let their

deeds be lost. Soon will He guide them and improve their condition,

and admit them to the Garden which He has announced for them.

o you who believe! If you will aid (the cause of) Allah, He will aid
 158

you, and plant your feet firmly. But those who reject (Allah), - for

them is destruction ... Those who reject Allah and hinder (men)

from the path of Allah, then die rejecting Allah, - Allah will not

forgive them. (Quran, 47:4-8, 34)

11. Remember your Rabb inspired the angels (with the message): "I

am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into

the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite you above their necks and

smite all their finger-tips off them." This because they contended

against Allah and His Apostle: if any contend against Allah and His

Apostle, Allah is strict in punishment. Thus (will it be said): "Taste

you then of the (punishment): for those who resist Allah, is the

penalty of the Fire." (Quran, 8:12-14)

12. Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their

past will be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of

those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And

fight them on until there is no more tumult and there prevail

justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere. But if they

cease, verily Allah does see all that they do. (Quran, 8:38-39)
 159

13. 0 Apostle! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty

among you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two

hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the

Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding. (Quran,

8:65)

14. Go you [Pagans], then, for four months, backwards and

forwards, (as you will), throughout the land. But know you that you

cannot frustrate Allah (by your falsehood) but that Allah will cover

with shame those who reject Him ... But when the forbidden

months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find

them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and

lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent,

and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then

open the way for them ... (Quran, 9:2,5)

 160

15. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold

that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle,

nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the

People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission

and feel themselves subdued ... o Prophet! strive hard against the

Unbelievers and Hypo¬crites, and be firm against them. Their

abode is Hell, - an evil refuge indeed ... When a Sura comes down,

informing them to believe in Allah and to strive and fight along with

His Apostle, those with wealth and influence among them ask you

for exemption ... But the Apostle, and those who believe with him,

strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are

(all) good things: and it is they who will prosper. Allah has prepared

for them Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein: that is

the supreme felicity ... 0 you who believe! Fight the Unbelievers

who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know

that Allah is with those who fear Him. (Quran, 9:29, 73, 86, 88, 89,

123)

16. Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them

with utmost strenuousness, with the (Quran). (Quran, 25:52)

 161

17. And Allah turned back the Unbelievers for (all) their fury: no

advantage did they gain; and enough is Allah for the Believers in

their fight... And those of the people of the Book who aided them -

Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror in

their hearts, (so that) some you slew, and some you made

prisoners. And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and

their goods, and of a land which you had not frequented (before).

And Allah has power over all things. (Quran, 33:25-27)

18. Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your

power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the

7.

98 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies ...
 162

Whatever you shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid

unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly. (Quran 8:60)

The Bible

1. Moses said to the people, " ... May Jehovah, the Elohim of your

ancestors, make you increase a thousand times more and make

you prosperous, as he promised '" But king Sihon would not let us

pass through his country. Jehovah your Elohim had made him

stubborn and rebellious, so that we could defeat him an.d take his

territory, which we still occupy. Then Jehovah saId to me, 'Look, I

have made king Sihon and his land help¬less before you; take his

land and occupy it.' Sihon came out with all his men to fight us

near the town of Jahaz, but Jehovah

. our Elohim put him in our power, and we killed him, his sons and

all his men. At the same time we captured and destroyed every

town, and put everyone to death, men women, and children. We left

no survivors. We took the Ii vestock and plundered the town.

(Deuteronomy, 1 :9-11; 2:30-35)

2. "When you go to attack a city, first give its people a chance to

surrender. If they open the gates and surrender, they are ~ll to

become your slaves and do forced labour for you. But If the people
 163

of that city will not surrender, but choose to figh~, surround it with

your army. Then when Jehovah your Elohim lets you capture the

city, kill every man in it. You may, ~owever, take for your slaves the

women, the children, the h~estock, and every thing else in the city.

You may use every thmg that belongs to your enemies. Jehovah

has given it to you. That is how you are to deal with those cities

that are far away from the land you will settle in. (Deuteronomy,

20: 10¬15)

3. "But when you capture the cities in the land that Jehovah your

Elohim is giving you, kill everyone. Completely destroy all the

people: the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the

Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as Jehovah ordered you

to do. Kill them, so that they will not make you sin against Jehovah

by teaching you to do all the disgusting things that they do in the

worship of their gods. (Deuteronomy, 20: 16-18)

The Quran

4. The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His

Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the

land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and

feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their
 164

disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the

Hereafter; except for those who repent before they fall into your

power: in that case, know that Allah is oft¬forgiving, most merciful.

(Quran, 5:36-37)

5. It is not fitting for an Apostle that he should have prisoners of

war until he has committed slaughter in the land ... o Apostle! say

to those who are captives in your hands: If Allah finds any good in

your hearts, He will give you some¬thing better than what has been

taken from you and He will forgive you: for Allah is oft-forgiving,

most merciful. But if they have treacherous designs against you, (0

Apostle!), they have already been in treason against Allah, and so

has He given (you) power over them ... (Quran, 8:70-71)

Sunnah of the Prophet of Islam

6. Then the apostle began his return journey to Medina with the

unbelieving prisoners, among whom were 'Uqba ... and al¬Naqr.

The apostle carried with him the booty that had been taken from

the polytheists ... Then the apostle went forward until when he

came out of the pass of al-Safra he halted on the sand hill between

the pass and al-Naziya called Sayar at a tree there and divided the

booty which Allah had granted to the Muslims equally ... When the
 165

apostle was in al-Safra, al-Naqr was killed by 'Ali, as the learned

Meccan told me. When he was in 'Irqu'l-Zebya 'Uqba was killed. He

had been captured by 'Abdullah ... When the apostle ordered him

to be killed

8.

'Uqba said, 'But who will look after my children, Muhammad?

'Hell', he said, and A.sim ... killed him. (Ibn Ishaq, p. 308).

7. When the apostle came to Banii Qurayza he halted by one of

their wells near their property called The well of Ana. The men

joined him ... The apostle besieged them for twenty-five nights until

they were sore pressed and Allah cast terror in their hearts ... In

the morning they submitted to the apostle's judgement... Then they

surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina. Then the

apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market

today) and dug trenches ill it. Then he sent for them and struck off

their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in

batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy and Ka 'b b.
 166

Asad, their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put

the figure as high as 800 or 900 ... This went on until the apostle

made an end of them ... Only one of their women was killed ... (Ibn

Ishaq, p. 461, 463).

8. A tradition says, " In whatever settlement you do not hear the

aziin or see no mosque, slaughter the people of that place."

(Tabqiit-i-Ibn Sa'd, Volume I, p. 488.)

The Quran:

1. 0 Prophet! We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you

have paid their dowers; and those whom your right hand possesses

out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to you ... For

the Believers (at large), We know what We have appointed for them

as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess

in order that there should be no difficulty for you ... It is not lawful

for you (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for

(other) wives, even though their beauty attract you, except any your

right hand should possess ... (Quran, 33:50,52)

2. Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom

your right hands possess: thus has Allah ordained (prohibitions)

against you ... (Quran, 4:24)

 167

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PATTERN

/ 101

3. If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing

women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your

right hands possess: and Allah has full knowledge about your Faith

... (Quran, 4:25)

4. The Believers must (eventually) win through, - those who humble

themselves in their prayers ... who abstain from sex, except with

those joined to them in the marriage b?nd, ~r (the captives) whom

your right hands possess, - for (m then case) they are free from

blame. (Quran, 23:1-6)

5. Marry those among you who are single, or the virtuous ones

among your slaves, male or female ... (Quran, 2~:32) ..

6. And those who guard their chastity, except wIth theIr wives and

the (captives) whom their right hands possess, ¬for (then) they are

not to be blamed) ... (Quran, 70:29-30)

Sunnah of the Prophet of Islam

7. Then the apostle divided the property, wives and children of

Banii Qurayza among the Muslims, and he made known on that

 168

day the shares of horse and men, and took out the fifth ... Then the

apostle sent Sa'd ... with some of the captive women of Banii

Qurayza and he sold them for horses and weapons ... Allah sent

down concerning the trench and Banii Qurayza the account which

is found in the sura of the Confederates. (Ibn Ishaq, 466).

Muhammadan Law

8. Slave Traffic [buying and selling of slaves] is not only allowed but

legislated for by Muhammadan law, and is clearly sanctioned by

the example of the Prophet as given in the Traditions (see Sahih

Muslim, Kitabu'l-Buyu', vol. I, p. 2). In the Law of Sale (see Raddu'l-

Muhtiir, Hidayah, Hamilton's ed., vol. II, p. 458), slaves, male and

female, are treated merely as articles of merchandise. In chapters

on sale, and option, and wills, the illustrations are generally given

as regards slaves, and the same, or very similar, rules apply both to

the sale of animals and bondsmen.

9.
 169

102 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION The following traditions (Mishkiit, book xiii, chapter

xx) with reference to the action of the Prophet in this matter are

notable:-

"Imran ibn aI-Husain said a man freed six slaves at his death, and

he had no other property besides; and the Prophet called them, and

divided them into three sections, and then cast lots; he then

ordered that two of them should be freed, and he retained four in

slavery, and spoke severely of the man who had set them free."

"Hibir said we used to sell the mothers of children in the time of the

Prophet, and of Abu Bakr ... " (Dictionary of Islam, p.598)

9. The Imam, with respect to captives, has it in his choice to slay

them, because the Prophet put captives to death, - and also,

because slaying them terminates wickedness: - Or, if he chose, he

may make them slaves, because by enslaving them the evil of them

is remedied, at the same time that the Mussalmans reap an

advantage: - or, if he please, he may release them so as to make

them freemen and Zimmees according to what is recorded of Umar:

- but it is not lawful s~ to release the idolaters of Arabia, or

apostates.
 170

It is not lawful for the Imam to return the captives to their own

country, as this would be strengthening the infidels against the

Mussalmans.

If captives become Mussalmans, let not the Imam put them to

death, because the evil of them is here remedied without slaying

them, but yet he may lawfully make them slaves, after their

conversion, because the reason for making them slaves, (namely,

there being secured within the Mussalman territory,) had existence

previous to their embracing the faith [of IslamJ. It is otherwise

where infidels become Mussalmans before their capture, because

then the reason for making them slaves did not exist previous to

their conversion.

It is not lawful to confer a favour upon captives by releasing them

gratuitously, - th~t is without receiving anything in return, or their

becoming Zimmees, or being made slaves.

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PA TIERN

/ 103

Shafei says that showing favour to captives, in this way, is lawful,

because the Prophet showed favour, in this way, to some of the

captives taken at the battle of Biddir. The arguments of our doctors

 171

upon this point are two-fold: first, (Allah) says in the Koran: "Slay

the idolaters wherever you find them; [Quran, 9:5J;" secondly, the

right of enslaving them is established by their being conquered and

captured, and. hence it is not lawful to annul that right without

receiving some advantage in return, in the same manner as holds

with respect to all plunder; and iIi respect to what Shafei relates,

that "the Prophet showed "favour, in this way, to some of the

captives taken at the battle of Biddir," it is abrogated by the text of

the Koran already quoted. (The Hedaya, pp. 160-161)

10. If a person purchase a female slave (for instance) by an invalid

contract, and take possession of her, and the seller take possession

of the purchase money, and the purchaser then dispose of her, by

sale, to another person at a profit, it is in that case incumbent on

him to bestow in charity the profit so acquired: - but if the first

seller should have acquired a profit upon, or by means of, the profit

money, he is not required to bestow such profit in charity.

The reason for this distinction is that as the female slave (for

instance) is a definite article, the second contract of sale relates

identically to her, and the profit acquired by the sale of her is

accordingly safe. (The Hedaya, p. 458)

 172

1. Jehovah said to Moses, "You and Eleazar, together with the other

leaders of the community, are to count everything that has been

captured, including the prisoners and the animals. Divide what

was taken into two equal parts, one part for the soldiers and the

other part for the rest of the community. From the part that

belongs to the soldiers, withhold as a tax for Jehovah one out of

every five hundred

10.

104 / INDIA'S SECULARISM: NEW NAME FOR NATIONAL

SUBVERSION prisoners and the same proportion of the cattle,

donkeys, sheep, and goats. Give them to Eleazar the priest as a

special contribution to Jehovah. From the part given to the rest of

the people, take one out of every fifty prisoners and the same

proportion of the cattle, donkeys, sheep, and goats. Give them to

the Levites who are in charge of Jehovah's Tent." Moses and

Eleazar did what Jehovah commanded.

 173

The following is the list of what was captured by the soldiers, in

addition to what they kept for themselves: 675,000 sheep and

goats, 72,000 cattle, 61 ;000 donkeys, and 32,000 virgins. The half

share of the soldiers was 337,500 sheep and goats, of which 675

were the tax for Jehovah; 36,000 cattle for the soldiers, of which 72

were the tax for Jehovah; 30,5000 donkeys for the soldiers, of

which 61 were the tax for Jehovah'

and 16,000 virgins for the soldiers, of which 32 were the tax for

Jehovah. So Moses gave Eleazar the tax as a special contribution to

Jehovah, as Jehovah had commanded.

The share of the community was the same as that for the soldiers:

337,500 sheep and goats, 36,000 cattle, 30,500 donkey, and 1

q,OOO virgins. From this share Moses took one out of every fifty

prisoners and animals, and as Jehovah had commanded, gave

them to the Levites who were in charge of Jehovah's Tent.

Then the officers who had commanded the army went to Moses and

reported, "Sir, we have counted the soldiers under our command

and not one of them is missing. So we are bringing the gold

ornaments, armlets, bracelets, rings, earring, and necklaces that

 174

each of us has taken. We offer them to Jehovah as a payment for

our lives, so that he will protect us. Moses and Eleazar received the

gold, all of which was in the form of ornaments. The total

contribution of the officers weighed nearly two hundred

kilogrammes. Those who were not officers kept the loot they had

taken. So Moses and Eleazar took the gold to the Tent, so that

Jehovah would protect the people of Israel. (Numbers, 31 :25-54)

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PATTERN

/ 105

The Quran

2. They ask you concerning (thing taken as) spoils of war.

Say: "(Such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Apostle: So

fear Allah, and keep straight the relations between yourselves: obey

Allah and His Apostle, if you do believe." (Quran, 8: 1)

3. And know that out of all the booty that you may acquire, (in war)

a fifth share is assigned to Allah and to the Apostle, and to near

relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer, ¬if you do believe

in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our Servant on the

 175

Day of Testing, - the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah

has power over all things. (Quran, 8:41)

4. And those of the People of the Book [the Jews] who aided them -

Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror

into their hearts. (So that) some you slew, and some you made

prisoners. And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and

their goods and of a land which you had not frequented (before).

And Allah has power over all things. (Quran, 33:26-27)

1. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold

that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle,

nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the

People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing

submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Quran, 9:29)

2. Zimmi is "a member of the Ahlu'z-Zimmah, a non¬Muslim

subject of a Muslim government, belonging to the Jewish,

Christian, or Sabean creed, who for the payment of a poll- or

capitation-tax, enjoys security of his person and property in a

Muhammad'an country". (Dictionary of Islam, p. 710)

 176

11.

3. Jizya, or capitation-tax is of two kinds. The first species is that

which is established voluntarily, and by composition, ¬the rate of

which is such as may be agreed upon by both parties, - because

the Prophet entered into a composition with the tribe of Binney

Bifran, for 1200 pieces of cloth, and not more ... The second species

is that which the Imam himself imposes, when he conquers infidels

and then confirms them in their possessions, the common rate of

which is fixed by his imposing upon every person in middling

circumstances, 24 dirms per annum or 2 dirms per month; - and

upon the labouring poor 12 dirms per annum, or 1 dirm per

month. This is according to our doctors. Shafei maintains that he

should exact from each sane and adult person, 1 deenar, or

some¬thing to that amount; - and the poor and wealthy are on an

equal footing in this point; because the Prophet said to Maaz, "Take

from every male, and female adult I deenar, or cloth to

. that value;" ... If Mussulman army subdue an infidel territory

before any capitation-tax be established, the inhabitants, together

with their wives and children, are all plunder, and the property of
 177

the State, as it is lawful to reduce to slavery all infidels, whether

they be Kitabees, Majoosees or idolaters. (The Hedaya, pp. 211,

213)

Disabilities imposed on Zimmis

1. They will not build new idol temples.

2. They will not rebuild any existing temple which may have

fallen into disrepair.

3. Muslim travellers will not be prevented from staying in temples.

4. Muslim travellers will be provided hospitality by Zimmis in their

own houses for three days.

5. Zimmis will neither act as spies nor give spies shelter in their

houses.

6. If any relation of a Zimmi is inclined towards Islam, he should

not be prevented fr~m doing so.

7. Zimmis will respect Muslims.

SCRIPTURAL SANCTIONS FOR THE BEHAVIOUR PAlTERN

/ 107
 178

8. Zimmis will courteously receive a Muslim wishing to attend their

meetings.

9. Zimrnis will not dress like Muslims.

10. They will not take Muslim names.

11. They will not ride horses with saddle and bridle.

12. They will not possess swords, bows or arrows.

13. They will not wear signet rings

- 14. They will not openly sell or drink irttoxicating liquor. 15. They

will not abandon their traditional dress, which is a sign of their

ignorance, in order that they may be distinguished from Muslims.

16. They will not openly practise their traditional customs amongst

Muslims.

17. They will not build their houses -in the neighbourhood of

Muslims.

18. They will not carry or bury their dead near Muslim graveyards .

19. They will not mourn their dead loudly.

20. They will not buy Muslim slaves.

 179

(Zakhiratu'l-Muluk, pp. 117-18 quoted in A History of Sufisim in

India, pp. 295-96).