You know what is the problem with India?
It’s the Muslims.
India has been under Muslim rule since 1001 (when Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Raja Jayapala of the Hindu Shahi Dynasty of Gandhara) till 1857 when the last of Muslim ruler Bahadur Shah Zafar (a reluctant leader) was captured. But still Muslims constitute less than 1/7 of the Indian population.
Muslims had the largest armies and controlled the most fertile lands for 800, yet they were unsuccessful in eliminating a threat. Why?
Is it because they were too genteel to force their subjects to adopt their faith?
At any given point of time in the country’s history, you are more likely to find a Hindu dominated area in a region under a prolonged Muslim rule (>100 years) than a Muslim dominated area under a Hindu ruler. Why?
If Akbar and other secular Muslim rulers would have seen Hindus of today, they might have probably sanctioned genocides rather than fund a Golden Temple.
When I see a communal violence, I do not know whom to blame.
Should I blame Muslims from this lack of foresight or should I blame Hindus for not being civilized?
Inherently we Hindus are fanatics who worship Swastika. During 3rd century BC we brutally exiled all the Buddhist cults that flourished during the time of Ashoka. Then 3 centuries later, we killed the Disciples of Christ who landed in Kerela.
Do you know what happened on the day India got Independence? These fanatics went back to their barbaric ways. They would have succeeded 60 years ago, had that old man in khadi was not there. But today, under the able leadership of Shiv Sena and VHP, this country shall be cleansed of beef eaters.
14 replies on “Communal Intolerance”
khadi, you mean? but tell me, are the muslims in this country the most tolerant and harmless guys around? is it a coincidence that most of the terror acts in the country have an islamic signature on them? why is it that wherever these guys exist in large numbers, there is always violence around? ethnic cleansing has been a part of all civilisations across the world, even till the last century, so we didnt start a trend, not that we needed to follow it, but thats history… and most importantly, what about my kind? beef eating hindus? hehe
thanks for correcting the typo… Damm these spell checkers… they converted a Gandhi into a RSS Fanatic wearking khaki nickers.
beef eating Hindus like you and me are doomed… we are outcasts who will burn in hell.
Regarding violence and muslims: if I look at the Indian data from the past 2 decades…. every year more muslims died in communal violence then hindus and other minorities put together. So either they are physically weak or they are less violent then Hindus.
Anyhow the idea of the post was not to spark communal tensions but to give a perspective that we should not forget that once upon a time muslims had an upper hand. Yet they did not drive hindus to extinction…
I can totally relate to it as my Family came to Pakistan in the late 60’s. You can’t force anyone to pray to Allah, Jesus or Ram. Its really surprising that Muslim leaders of dose times had this kind of reasonable approach.Thank God there was no TALIBAN at that time.
The need is to clean our respective countries from TALIBAN, ALQAEDA, Shiv Sena etc. We have an example of Hezbollah, its really encouraging and inspiring to see that both Christians and Sunni muslims are under the flag of this Shia muslim organisation.
Very interesting! And some good food for thought for these right wing nuts like Modi and Togadia. To add to what you’ve already said, Akbar, during his rule, preached and propagated communal harmony and secularism and tried to induct courtiers from all religious beliefs and provide them representation in the administration of his provinces. And to answer the above commenter on why “most of the terror acts in the country have an islamic signature on them”, it is better to look at the root causes. I’ve met so many educated people who look down upon Muslims just because they are Muslim and this prejudice makes its way around in various subtle and radical forms. There are few bad apples everywhere but generalising the entire Muslim population because of them is something that should definitely be avoided.
LOL – Hilarious… 🙂
thats exactly the point.. indians today have a closed mind… in the name of being orthodox they are committing crimes and sins which can only bring the decline of the civilizatin
Good post, never thought about why they are so little muslims in the country before !
Thanx for your comment otherwise i couldn’t fathom where you were going!!!
Right point you have there … lets see if we could have a secular government as Akbar.!!!
brother the one line gist of the passage is:
“Muslims ruled india for 800 hundred years, yet they did not eliminate Hindus. However the day India got independence (or hindus regained control) they exiled/ethnically cleansed most of the Muslims from this subcontinent.”
Parents of my friend Ammar were lucky they got a safe passage, but many were not. What I am saying is that is Hindus are bigger fanatics and jehadis than what muslims can ever be.
SO true my friend! Jinnah saw it coming ages ago.
Regarding violence and muslims: if I look at the Indian data from the past 2 decades…. every year more muslims died in communal violence then hindus and other minorities put together. So either they are physically weak or they are less violent then Hindus.
Hindus are bigger fanatics and jehadis than what muslims can ever be.
Inherently we Hindus are fanatics who worship Swastika. During 3rd century BC we brutally exiled all the Buddhist cults that flourished during the time of Ashoka. Then 3 centuries later, we killed the Disciples of Christ who landed in Kerela.
amusing ankur,:-)
where did you get ur data? this is one of ur most amature posts
simple logic tells me that in circumstances of riot or war if one opponent is 70% of popln and the other is 20% of popln then statistically which group will loose more men if all things be equal?
brutally exiled all the Buddhist cults – any doc evidence ?
most of conversion from buddhism was relatively peaceful mainly due to Adi Shankaracharya
Read about the conquistadors and the spanish history to understand how good
u have forgotten a basic fact muslims are still a minority with a population of 30% appx, Look no further than kashmir if u want to realise what happens when they become a majority, i had a great interaction with a kashmiri pundit friend and a stranger, both gave me a good understanding of how islamists
operate, she doesnt know if her parents will be dead or alive the next time she calls up kashmir.
Btw for Akbar it was a necessity cause it meant his political survival people following him werent that good or that secular.looks like u have read one too many jnu influenced history books
plus akbar realised what the british did dont mess with peoples religion or else ur sure to fall plus u are not taking into account the population of states such as pakistan burma lanka etc which were part of india over history
//this is one of ur most amature posts//
well i am an amateur…. (look at the strings of disclaimer i have attached in my posts/about me etc.
//where did you get ur data? //
well the data of no of casualties and no of incidents was published in hindu a couple of months back. I can dig it up for u if u want. its hard to believe, but indeed more muslims died in communal violence than hindus.
//Look no further than kashmir if u want to realise what happens when they become a majority, //
well what i am trying to say is that they were the rulers for several centuries and had absolute freedom to do whatever they wanted to .. still hindus survived… somehow i find it very hard to believe and really really interesting… however not many indians ever realize the significance of this fact.
//brutally exiled all the Buddhist cults – any doc evidence ?//
http://enagar.com/2005/06/01/did-buddhism-die-out-so-easily/
before writing this post 2 years ago, we did search for the documents, but its hard to find… but chineese (and korean) history clearly mentions that the monks were asked to leave.. they did not migrate to the east on their own.
//Read about the conquistadors and the spanish history to understand how good//
well those guys completely wiped out the natives and slept with the rest and hence leaving no trace of pure natives…
//looks like u have read one too many jnu influenced history books//
yups i like to read alternate views… there is no fun going with the crown.
//plus akbar realised what the british did dont mess with peoples religion or else ur sure to fall plus u are not taking into account the population of states such as pakistan burma lanka etc which were part of india over history//
yups after 1857, british realized that as long as they did not hurt the religious sentiments they can do practically anything in india… a lesson which they never forgot.
hindu is as unreliable as xinhua so dont please quote them if the cp china says mao was an indian prince it would be headline news in hindu
chindu is what i read generally
it took 100 yrs for the british to realise what akbar realised earlier on.
just look at pre independence/post independence/now popln stats of india pak and bangladesh then talk about hindus being barbaric
this is sad thing about us secular Hindus, most of the people u talk about are minority and most of the times they as a % of overall hindu population are a tiny minority , tinier than the radical bunch of muslims and christians in%age terms to the total muslim or christian popln.
interestingly for the past 3 weeks I am in a land where religion is of no importance. majority of the people out here do not have a religion… something which I find odd, but they don’t know the significance of religion….
yet that does not mean koreans do not have a reason to divide themselves and make distinctions….
i have a feeling that by dividing ourselves, we might make our group smaller, but closer. and all humans want to be a part of a group. So if they do not find religion, they find somthing else.
in countries where they have only one religion, they still manage to form sects/clans and further divide themselves…
interesting isn’t it?
true man is a social animal but in a close nit society
even in papua new gunea or amazon people like to stick to smaller groups