What's new

Hindu-Muslim antagonism

MarkTheTruth

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
269
Reaction score
0
The first brick of Hindu-Muslim antagonism was laid when Muhammad Bin Qasim raised the banner of Islam in Sindh in 712 AD and tens of thousands of lower caste Hindus and Buddhists suffering under the tyrannical yoke of Raja Dahir embraced Islam. Throughout 1000 years rule of India by the Muslims, Hindu cultural values and religious sentiments were respected and preserved. Benevolence of Muslim rulers of India and their patronage to high caste Hindus resulted in failure to assimilate Hinduism into fold of Islam. This can be gauged from the fact that at the time of partition of India, Muslim strength in the Indian subcontinent was mere 22%.

Hindus never reconciled to any meaningful integration with generous Muslim culture. Behind apparent public cordiality, there was deep-seated antagonism in private. Muslims were always looked down upon as defiled and polluted and treated as intruders. Hinduism reluctantly submitted to Muslim rule, but all the time it strived to weaken Islamic society by corroding it from within.

When the British captured power in India, Hindus became natural allies of the British and both went all out to destroy social, educational, cultural and religious heritage of Muslims. Hindus deep-rooted hatred got accentuated when the Muslims opted for a separate homeland.

Notwithstanding the aspirations of the Muslims of India, the idea of a separate Muslim state was repugnant to Indian Congress and hence unacceptable to them. This led to a bitter and prolonged quarrel between the two communities. While it was a question of survival for the Muslims, for Hindus it was the matter of preventing vivisection of so-called Mahabharata.

Despite many hurdles created by Hindu leaders, upsurge for gaining independence was too great and beyond human control. In spite of MA Jinnah’s loud protestations, provinces of Bengal and Punjab were deliberately partitioned while Kashmir was allowed to accede to India to make him change his mind. These callous acts failed to deter him but sowed seeds of permanent discord between Pakistan and India. When the Kashmiris rose up in revolt, over two-third of Kashmir was forcibly annexed by Indian forces.

Failing to reconcile to the existence of Pakistan and cherishing the fond hope of its re-absorption into Indian dominion, Indian leaders worked hard for the dismemberment of Pakistan soon after its inception. Many Indians regarded the creation of Pakistan as a tragic mistake that could still be corrected. Break up of Pakistan and its absorption within the fold of Indian Union had become the national goal of Congress leaders. To consolidate the Indian dominion, by March 1949, India had absorbed 538 princely states out of a total of 565. India’s insatiable greed to gorge as many states and her menacing attitude towards Pakistan made the latter wary and worried.

Pakistan’s geographical frontiers had yet to be determined. It was without a seat of government or an administrative structure to enable it to exercise its’ sovereignty. It was without a constitution; its’ armed forces were scattered; civil servants and other administrative and technical hands were in the midst of migrating from India; its political and economic system was completely disrupted and the communication system had broken down.

As if these settling problems and the hanging evil shadow of Mountbatten and Radcliffe were not enough, Pakistan’s horizons clouded with hostile acts of its neighbors in the east and the northwest. Their hostility cast perverse shadows across its path. Hindu leaders in their quest to re-unite India continued to hurl threats and saddle Pakistan with knotty problems to prevent the toddling state from standing on its own feet. They refused to accept the creation of Pakistan with good grace, and to settle all outstanding differences on the basis of justice and fair play. They regarded Pakistan as a transient euphoria of Muslims.

Sir Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of the Pakistan Army having read the intentions of the Indians opined, “I have no hesitation in affirming that the present Indian Cabinet are implacably determined to do all in their power to prevent the establishment of the dominion of Pakistan on a firm basis”.

According to Brecher, “Most of Congress leaders and Nehru among them, subscribed to the view that Pakistan was not a viable state—politically, economically, geographically or militarily and that sooner or later the areas which had ceded would be compelled by force of circumstances to return to the fold”.

In struggling to create a state structure in the chaotic environments of partition and an early war with India over Kashmir, our managers remained tied down fighting the battle of survival and identity. There was no certainty that Pakistan would survive its traumatic birth. “Very few states in the world started with greater handicaps than Pakistan did on August 14, 1947”.

After a lapse of over six decades, it is rather not possible for the present younger generation to perceive the complexities faced by the pioneers of Pakistan at the time of independence. For those who lived through that trying period of history and personally experienced the turmoil, human tragedies, mass carnage of the Muslims by the Hindu-Sikh combine, and the Hindus abominable Bania mentality, it was a nightmare.

Given their common past spread over centuries it was hoped that the two countries after having won their independence from the seductive tentacles of the British Raj would close the chapter of suspicion and aversion and instead strive to live as peaceful neighbors. It was expected that rather than beating war drums and sinking into the bottomless ocean of arms race, leaders of the two countries would concentrate on well being of the people through mutual cooperation. Unfortunately, those hopes remained an elusive dream.

Adversarial history of sixty-two years covering the whole existence of the two nations has in fact made the minds captive of a hate each other syndrome. Jingoistic statements are often hurled at each other to play with the emotions of the people or to satisfy sadistic instincts. After tearing Pakistan into two in 1971, Indian hawkish leaders keep scheming to fragment rest of Pakistan. 1980s saw rise of Hindu fundamentalism in India. Militant BJP government in India that captured power twice repeatedly voiced its wish to reunite the subcontinent and to annex Azad Kashmir by force and vowed to establish Hindutva. Indian Congress is no less antagonistic towards Pakistan and has taken no steps to control growth of Hindu fundamentalism which is intolerant towards all other minorities in India.

Hate phobia and age-old prejudices in the two neighboring countries have not died down. Hindus continue to view the Muslims as destroyers of Hindus culture and for mutilating mother India. Their pent-up anger and hatred against Indian Muslims was physically demonstrated in 1992, when Ayodhya mosque was pulled down and it was demanded that a temple be erected at the same site. Large scale state sponsored massacre of Muslims in Gujarat took place in 2003. Muslims in occupied Kashmir are killed like stray dogs and women brazenly raped. Indian Muslims are eyed with suspicion and treated shabbily. Shiv Sena Chief Bal Thackeray stated on 12 January that Indian Muslims are untrustworthy since they are loyal to Pakistan. On the slightest pretext Hindu scalawags fan communal riots and kill tens of Muslims. These riots in India have increased rather than lessened with the passage of time. 13% Muslim minority in India feels marooned and fearfully watch the growing Hindu fanaticism which finds no place for the Indian Muslims unless they adhere to Hindutva and agree to join the ranks of Sudras (untouchables).

Glimpse of Indian deep-seated antagonism was seen on the occasion of a terrorist attack on Indian parliament on 13 December 2001 in which not a single parliamentarian was killed, injured or even abused. While the whole nation bayed for blood of Pakistan on mere suspicion, Indian armed forces rushed towards their western border and remained in a menacing mode for ten months. This kind of frenetic fury and war mongering was again seen in the aftermath of 26/11. Over one year has lapsed but Indian leaders have not forgotten the incident and refuse to recommence composite dialogue. They do not recall the deep wounds they have consistently inflicted upon Pakistan without any sense of remorse. They ignore that thousands of innocent Pakistanis have died as a result of ongoing RAW sponsored acts of terror. As long as India is ruled by self serving vicious Brahmans, antagonism will prevail and hope for peaceful co-existence will remain elusive.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence and political analyst.

http://www.markthetruth.com/history-a-pakistan/9-defending-the-ideology.html
 
I read only these lines and then I realised.....I am wasting my time.

The first brick of Hindu-Muslim antagonism was laid when Muhammad Bin Qasim raised the banner of Islam in Sindh in 712 AD and tens of thousands of lower caste Hindus and Buddhists suffering under the tyrannical yoke of Raja Dahir embraced Islam
 
Mark the truth - There is no truth in the article,or R u immune to truth ,its just an article to show Indians and Hindus in particular in a bad light.
You seem to be suffering with too much of victim mentality.

pls. see a good doctor who might help you.
 
Last edited:
Article demonstrates how successfully history has been fabricated and preached all over Pakistan. Pakistan is Existing because of this concocted stories and mark my word Truth cant be hidden forever.
 
Is Jaswant Singh a Baluch ?
The above link which a gave says that JS is a balouch .Can anyone verify that ?
 
I am sorry mark the truth, we are already immunized against such fake articles by this website...I am sorry very sorry..

The real history of Pakistan
History of Jihad against the Hindus of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (638 - Ongoing)

We have a significant Muslim population in India most of whom regard themselves as Indian first. They are our brothers and sisters. Out of respect to them and most of the world's Islamic community who are decent and peace loving people, we should not be supporting or posting links to articles such as the one you did above. It is an anti Muslim rant article written by an ignorant person/s. Historically, Islam like Christianity and Hinduism and Judaism did conduct warfare to conquer territory and to convert conquered people to their way of thinking. To insult Islamic manner of conducting warfare in the past whilst turning a blind eye to the atrocities of other religions in their warfare conduct is being as ignorant as the article which commenced this thread. In other words, to fight stupidity with stupidity does not resolve anything :cheers:
 
totally agree with you bro..to insult a religion to counter one's argument is not justified ..
 
Why you people hold religions with such great reference ? I don't understand .Religions should be criticized left and right. The diamond sparkles when it is trimmed. By criticizing the false will die out and the truth will remain.
 
here are some videos for reference, and how minorities are treated in Pakistan.



In India sikh religion has no recognition and are given certificates under the Hindu religion where as Pakistan recognizes a minority's religion which is far lesser than in number compared to India and gives them recognition based on their religion, now who is secular.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why you people hold religions with such great reference ? I don't understand .Religions should be criticized left and right. The diamond sparkles when it is trimmed. By criticizing the false will die out and the truth will remain.

I don't know what you know about religions. Truth is i don't know anything about any religion but I'm saying from the little knowledge I have. First of all this is not the place to discuss the good and bad of a religion. Its a military forum (?) so the talk should be limited that section only. Also religion is something that cannot be talked down in any mere Internet forums. Billions if people believes in different religions. The forums are not the last words of these religions

The most important point about religion is that The good and bad of a religion must come from religion itself.
 
In India sikh religion has no recognition and are given certificates under the Hindu religion where as Pakistan recognizes a minority's religion which is far lesser than in number compared to India and gives them recognition based on their religion, now who is secular.

You got the India related part wrong bro. Yes, the law that governs civil laws for Sikhs falls under the Hindu marriage act. But so is the case with Jains and Buddhists as well. Its more related to similarity in traditions and affairs of these religions than an attempt to undermine them. Agreed, if given a choice, I'd rather have a different law board to govern Sikh affairs to allay any fears.

The Muslims in India have their separate law structure called the All Muslim Personal Law Board because they wanted to make a point that they are different and their affairs should be treated differently. Plus it also has to do with votebank politics as usual.
 
Back
Top Bottom