With what result? Pakistani historians have produced a distorted history of their nation with few truths and much falsifications! Will future generations of Pakistanis accept this false history once they know the truth? I doubt it.
According to Pak historians, Pakistan has three founders: Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Muhammed-bin-Qazim and Mahmud of Ghazni. They are hailed as the supreme heroes. That they?especially Qazim and Mahmud?are hated by Hindus has not been of any concern to these historians.
Qazim is the Arab crusader for the ?one and only true religion??Islam. He ?ushered in a new era and the glorious ascendancy of Islam on Pak soil.? That he was defeated over and over again by the Hindu kings of Sind finds no mention in Pak history. Nor is there any mention that King Dahir of Sind was a hero of the Sindhis. Instead, he is characterised as cruel and despotic. Satish Chandra, the Indian historian, dismisses the invasion of Qazim (712 AD) as a matter of no consequence. The Sindhi students refuse to be beguiled by such false history. We are told that they skip the history lessons.
The textbooks do not say anything on the atrocities committed by Qazim?on how he beheaded the Hindu youths, on the capture of tens of thousands of women to be exported to Arabia. Nor is there any mention of the Sindhi hero G.M. Syed, who fought for an independent Sind or of his appeal to Smt Gandhi to liberate Sind along with Bangla in 1971.
For 300 years, there was no fresh attack from the Arabs. And when it came, it was from Afghanistan. The first raid of Mahmud, son of a Turkish slave, came in 1001 AD and ended in the attack on Somnath Temple in 1025 AD.
Thus, Mahmud kept the whole of India in terror for a quarter of a century, plundering and destroying the temples, looting the places, capturing women and massacring the men. But there is no mention of any of these in Pak history. Instead, it is proclaimed that ?the success (of Mahmud) at Somnath was a source of happiness for the whole Muslim world.? Why? Because Mahmud destroyed the idols of Somnath!
Mahmud made 17 raids on India. They went as for as Patna, Mathura and Somnath. On this, Nehru writes: ?From Thaneswar, he took away, it is said, 200,000 captives and vast wealth. But it was in Somnath that he got the most treasure, for this was one of the great temples and the offerings of centuries had accumulated there. It is said that thousands of people took refuge in the temple when Mahmud approached the temple…the temple was broken and looted by Mahmud and 50,000 people perished.? All these atrocities in one raid!
Nehru'sfinal judgement on the man was: ?Mahmud is looked upon as a great leader of Islam, who came to spread Islam in India. Most Muslims adore him, most Hindus hate him. As a matter of fact, he was hardly a religious man. He was a Mohammedan, of course, but that was by the way…He came to India to conquer and loot…? Such was Mahmud?the founder of Pakistan!
And what kind of an ?ideal? Muslim was he when he threatened the Muslim rulers of Sind? He even threatened the Caliph of Baghdad, the supreme authority of Islam, with death and demanded Samarkhand from him.
Mahmud had a Hindu army and a Hindu commander (Tilak). He used them to suppress the Muslims of Central Asia and he used his Muslim army to raid India. How can this man be a hero of Islam, not to speak of being a founder of Pakistan!
But Pak textbooks proudly proclaim that Mahmud rode into India under the ?flag of Islam? to convert the ?pagans of India?!
In contrast NCERT textbooks emphasise the element of plunder, if at all they say anything against Muslim invasion, while suppressing all the religious elements.
But why this contrast? Because the besotted secularists of this country do not want the Hindus to know how these foreign invaders tried to wipe out the Hindu civilisation from this country. In 1989, the West Bengal communists went to the extent of ordering the deletion of most discussions on the medieval period which touched upon Muslim invasion and Muslim rule!
Are we, dear Reader, living in a world of intelligent and rational human beings? Or of demented men?
Comments